Make an inference. if the baking soda has not been added, would there still have been a source of carbon dioxide in the water? explain

Yes there would still be a source of carbon dioxide in the water.

Explanation:

"Carbon Dioxide is present in water in the form of a dissolved gas.Surface waters normally contain less than 10 ppm free carbon dioxide, while some ground waters may easily exceed that concentration. Carbon dioxide is readily soluble in water. Over the ordinary temperature range (0-30 C) the solubility is about 200 times that of oxygen. Calcium and magnesium combine with carbon dioxide to form carbonates and bicarbonates.

Aquatic plant life depends upon carbon dioxide and bicarbonates in water for growth. Microscopic plant life suspended in the water, phytoplankton, as well as large rooted plants, utilize carbon dioxide in the photosynthesis of plant materials; starches, sugars, oils, proteins. The carbon in all these materials comes from the carbon dioxide in water.

When the oxygen concentration in waters containing organic matter is reduced, the carbon dioxide concentration rises. The rise in carbon dioxide makes it more difficult for fish to use the limited amount of oxygen present. To take on fresh oxygen, fish must first discharge the carbon dioxide in their blood streams and this is a much slower process when there are high concentration of carbon dioxide in the water itself."

the answer

b.) bowling ball

the last one: artificial selection/genetic engineering

plant breeding is modifying the genetic composition of the plant - but this isn't cloning (which is specifically introducing a gene into a genome). but you are artificially selecting for the phenotype that you want.

the second one is literally genetic engineering - the gene would have been cloned first and then inserted or genetically engineered into the new plant cell (the cotton).