Law homework help. You are going to design (but not do) a test to see if a GM crop or food is different from its NGM counterpart. Before continuing, please read my class handouts on hypotheses and errors, Rensvold (2009a) and Rensvold (2009b). You will find links to these on the Background page.1. What will your null and alternative hypotheses be? (Hints: Ensure your alternative hypothesis specifies a difference between GM and NGM foods or crops, while your null hypothesis specifies NO difference. Be sure to specify your dependent variable (DV); that is, what you’re interested in testing. Some of these are yield per acre, drought tolerance, protein content, pest resistance, and whether GM crops are more likely to cause illness [specify the illness] than NGM crops. Also, be sure to specify the food, or the crop. [You can’t cover all foods and crops in one hypothesis!])2. What significance level will you use to test this hypothesis? Why this level?3. Would the Chi Square hypothesis test apply to this study? Why? (Hint: Chi Square is for nominal data having no presumed distribution. Its usefulness depends upon your choice of DV. Remember, the IV is the type of food or crop: either GM, or NGM. The IV is nominal; is your DV also nominal? It depends on your hypothesis.)Write a 2-3 page MS Word paper addressing the issues above, and using the style and format described in your Syllabus. Submit the paper via CourseNet. Case Assignment Expectations:In general, cases are expected to have the attributes of precision, clarity, breadth, depth, and critical thinking. However, not all of these attributes are applicable to all cases, especially in math and science courses. For this case, the expectations are:Briefly, but adequately, explain the background of the problem (breadth). State testable hypotheses. Be specific with respect to crop, and the difference to be tested, such as yield per acre (clarity). Choose an appropriate level of significance, and explain your choice (critical thinking). State whether the chi-squared test would be appropriate (critical thinking).