Scientists working in the fields of both genetics and archaeology have made discoveries that help us understand the origin of maize. Which statement(s) best reflect the way(s) each discipline's work support evidence generated by the other?
Genetics data pinpointed the likely location of the earliest maize domestication, which allowed archaeologists to find fossil evidence of early maize in caves.
Geneticists used DNA data to determine how long ago maize was domesticated. Archaeologists then verified the conclusion by dating maize microfossils.

Genetics and Archaeology of Maize

Explanation:

Genetic evidence pointed the archaeologists to a specific locality to look for evidence of maize domestication; archaeologists found microfossils on grinding stones that matched that age of the earliest maize predicted by DNA analysisScientists used the archaeological and genetics evidence for discovering the origin of maize with the examination of DNA data Archaeologists examine the fossil evidences of maize in caves and determined the domestication of maize Hence, the right statement of  discipline work is "Genetics Used DNA data pointed the likely location of the earliest maize"

When the temperature rises it can cause the enzyme to get denatured

Because they are stupid and insensitive