A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996

Unfortunately there aren't any clear-cut rules for this sort of thing. It just comes down to emphasis: do you want to emphasize the change itself (i.e. a distinct rise or increase in temperature or interest rates), or do you want to emphasize the changing nature of the temperature (or interest rates or whatever)? The latter might emphasize that the thing is still in flux, while the former might emphasize a discrete change or "jump" in level.

But that's an awfully subtle distinction, so trying to invent a general rule for this probably won't help. You're better off looking for other decision points first and then using something like this as a last resort.

For example, in the Federal Reserve question (https://gmatclub.com/forum/noting-that- ... 75249.html), (C) and (D) can be eliminated right away because of subject-verb agreement issues. Choice (E) has some confusing pronouns, so we're already leaning towards (B).

It also probably makes more sense to refer to rising interest in general, as opposed to a single, discrete rise in interest rates. That gives us one more small vote in favor of (B), but basing your decision solely on that minor difference is a bad idea. Again, there are no clear-cut rules that will allow you to quickly and easily pick one over the other, sadly.

As for this question, check out our full explanation here, if you haven't already.

I hope that helps!

Hi KarishmaB ,

Here in OPTION A possibly resulting is incorrectly modifying the previous action and its performer ie were suffering and creatures
This modification is wrong because the intended meaning is that the food supplies were decreasing because of increase in sea surface temperature during the same period.

Also, the verb-ing modifier (resulting) cannot modify food supplies. Am I Right ?

Regards

Yes, just focus on the 'that clause'

...creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

We have to say that 'the decrease in food supplies' is a result of increasing sea surface temperatures.
But in option (A), 'resulting from ...' seems to modify 'creatures were suffering.' But the suffering was not a result of increasing sea surface temps. The decrease in food supplies is responsible for suffering.

'resulting from ...' cannot modify food supplies and actually we need to modify the 'decrease' in food supplies so it will be better to give it separately as a noun if we were to modify it. e.g.
... the decrease in food supply, resulting from ....

A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

Option Elimination -

(A) that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing - One, we say that they suffer from dwindling food supplies, and then we say "were suffering" resulting from increasing sea temperatures - How are they suffering from both? The intended meaning is that they were suffering because of dwindling food supplies and food supplies are dwindling as a result of an increase in temperatures. That's what B does.

(B) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in - ok

(C) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing - wrong meaning - suffering from food supplies.

(D) creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in - we need that, and the same issue as C.

(E) creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing - which (pronoun) modifying verb were dwindling is wrong.