Question

The effect of phosphate supplementation on bone formation was assessed in six healthy adult dogs. For each dog, bone formation was measured for a 12-week period of phosphate supplementation as well as for a 12-week control period. Here are the results in percent growth per year:

Dog	1	2	3	4	5	6
Control	1.73	3.37	3.59	2.05	1.86	3.60
Phosphate	8.16	4.58	3.98	5.24	3.04	7.03

The authors concluded that phosphate supplementation significantly increased bone formation compared to the control. Do an analysis to verify this statement.

A) State the null and alternative hypotheses.

B) What is the P –value for this test?

C) What is your conclusion? Reject H₀ or Do not reject H₀?

D) Write a sentence describing your conclusion.

Answer 1

(A)

H0: Null Hypothesis: (The phosphate supplementation did not significantly increase bone formation compared to the control )

HA: Alternative Hypothesis: (The phosphate supplementation significantly increased bone formation compared to the control ) (Claim)

(B)

From the given data, values of d = Control - Phosphate are got as follows:

d = Control - Phosphate = - 6.43, - 1.21, - 0.39, - 3.19, - 1.18, - 3.43

From d values, the following statistics are calculated:

n = Sample Size = 6

= Mean of d values = - 2.638

sd = Standard Deviation of d values = 2.215

Test Statisticis given by:

df = 6 - 1 = 5

By Tehnology, P - value = 0.0166

So,

the P –value for this test = 0.0166

(C)

Take = 0.05

Since P - value = 0.0166 is less than = 0.05, the difference is significant. Reject null hypothesis.

So,

Reject H0

(D)

The data support the claim that the phosphate supplementation significantly increased bone formation compared to the control.