Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

 It is currently 23 Aug 2016, 23:05

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Current Student
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 915
Concentration: General Management, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
WE: Information Technology (Investment Banking)
Followers: 21

Kudos [?]: 597 [3] , given: 322

After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jan 2013, 00:07
3
KUDOS
4
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

95% (hard)

Question Stats:

24% (02:38) correct 76% (01:41) wrong based on 605 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach pier got sick from consuming locally fished hermit crabs, the Rotunda Beach city authorities posted signs cautioning against the consumption of the crabs. Tests revealed that the crabs were high in prestic acid, a dangerous chemical. But a marked decline in the number of goldfish found by the beach has led to the removal of the warning signs.

Which of the following, if true, would best explain the removal of the signs?

Goldfish found off Rotunda Beach cause hermit crabs to excrete prestic acid.
The amount of prestic acid produced by an individual goldfish has a direct positive correlation with the density of the goldfish population in that goldfish’s immediate vicinity.
Goldfish consume various parasites that often contain prestic acid.
Rotunda Beach is notoriously polluted.
Goldfish would not be able to inhabit the waters off Rotunda Beach if those waters were not saturated with a precise mixture of acids, including prestic acid.
Source: Veri Prep
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

_________________

Rgds,
TGC!
_____________________________________________________________________
I Assisted You => KUDOS Please
_____________________________________________________________________________

Senior Manager
Status: Final Lap
Joined: 25 Oct 2012
Posts: 287
Concentration: General Management, Entrepreneurship
GPA: 3.54
WE: Project Management (Retail Banking)
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 254 [0], given: 85

Re: After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Jan 2013, 08:08
targetgmatchotu wrote:
After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach pier got sick from consuming locally fished hermit crabs, the Rotunda Beach city authorities posted signs cautioning against the consumption of the crabs. Tests revealed that the crabs were high in prestic acid, a dangerous chemical. But a marked decline in the number of goldfish found by the beach has led to the removal of the warning signs.

Which of the following, if true, would best explain the removal of the signs?

Goldfish found off Rotunda Beach cause hermit crabs to excrete prestic acid.
The amount of prestic acid produced by an individual goldfish has a direct positive correlation with the density of the goldfish population in that goldfish’s immediate vicinity.
Goldfish consume various parasites that often contain prestic acid.
Rotunda Beach is notoriously polluted.
Goldfish would not be able to inhabit the waters off Rotunda Beach if those waters were not saturated with a precise mixture of acids, including prestic acid.
Source: Veri Prep

Nice question !!!
my choices were narrowed down to A and B. i can't figure out which one is correct ?!
_________________

KUDOS is the good manner to help the entire community.

Manager
Status: Dedicates 2013 to MBA !!
Joined: 06 Jul 2012
Posts: 56
Location: United States (MI)
Concentration: Entrepreneurship, General Management
GPA: 3.8
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Followers: 9

Kudos [?]: 137 [0], given: 14

Re: After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Jan 2013, 14:23
I'm not shy to say that I quite did not understand this one. Experts please !!
_________________

Thanks and Regards,
Charu Kapoor

Never Never Never GIVE UP !!

Manager
Joined: 31 May 2012
Posts: 164
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 119 [0], given: 69

Re: After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Jan 2013, 21:14
IMO: A
Premise 1: Eating the hermit crabs, fishermen got sick. So, Authorities displayed warning sign to forbid from eating crabs.
Premise 2: Crabs were acidic chemical prestic acid.
Conclusion: Authorities removed warning signal knowing decline in the goldfish population.

A) Goldfish found off Rotunda Beach cause hermit crabs to excrete prestic acid. Fishermen got sick by eating crab, whose excreta was acidic because of presence of goldfish around. Its good correlation. Now, As goldfish population has declined, it's correct to assume, crabs will not excrete prestic acid.
B) The amount of prestic acid produced by an individual goldfish has a direct positive correlation with the density of the goldfish population in that goldfish’s immediate vicinity. Prestic acid is proportional to goldfish population? then why fishermen felt sick by eating crab. They didn't eat goldfish. Wrong. No correlation with hermit crabs.
C) Goldfish consume various parasites that often contain prestic acid. Same error as B.
D) Rotunda Beach is notoriously polluted. Out of scope. Pollution has no interrelation with crabs and fishes.
E) Goldfish would not be able to inhabit the waters off Rotunda Beach if those waters were not saturated with a precise mixture of acids, including prestic acid. Same error as B,C

I am not convinced with OA. Can anyone please put light on this ?
Current Student
Joined: 03 Aug 2012
Posts: 915
Concentration: General Management, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q47 V29
GMAT 2: 680 Q50 V32
GPA: 3.7
WE: Information Technology (Investment Banking)
Followers: 21

Kudos [?]: 597 [5] , given: 322

Re: After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach [#permalink]

### Show Tags

29 Jan 2013, 22:21
5
KUDOS
After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach pier got sick from consuming locally fished hermit crabs, the Rotunda Beach city authorities posted signs cautioning against the consumption of the crabs. Tests revealed that the crabs were high in prestic acid, a dangerous chemical. But a marked decline in the number of goldfish found by the beach has led to the removal of the warning signs.

Premise: High prestic Acid in Hermit crab =>People got sick => Caution signs against Hermit Crabs
Conclusion: Decline in GF => Removal of signs.

Now how does conclusion is linked with premise in the stimulus , is what we have to answer .Because conclusion mentions GF and premise mentions HC.So there must be some relation between GF and prestic acid.

Which of the following, if true, would best explain the removal of the signs?

Goldfish found off Rotunda Beach cause hermit crabs to excrete prestic acid.
This shows that signs shouldn't be removed because GF decline =>HC will less excrete prestic acid => People Sick
The amount of prestic acid produced by an individual goldfish has a direct positive correlation with the density of the goldfish population in that goldfish’s immediate vicinity.
If Density of GF directly proportional to the Prestic acid , the according to conclusion
GF decline => Density of GF declines => Less Prestic acid => HC safe =>People will not get sick => Removal of signs.

Goldfish consume various parasites that often contain prestic acid.
Out of scope, we talking about Acid not parasites
Rotunda Beach is notoriously polluted.
Out of scope
Goldfish would not be able to inhabit the waters off Rotunda Beach if those waters were not saturated with a precise mixture of acids, including prestic acid.
Not related to argument

Hope it helps !!!
_________________

Rgds,
TGC!
_____________________________________________________________________
I Assisted You => KUDOS Please
_____________________________________________________________________________

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 9134
Followers: 797

Kudos [?]: 164 [0], given: 0

Re: After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jul 2014, 05:19
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Intern
Joined: 29 Jun 2014
Posts: 2
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Re: After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jul 2014, 07:46
TGC wrote:
After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach pier got sick from consuming locally fished hermit crabs, the Rotunda Beach city authorities posted signs cautioning against the consumption of the crabs. Tests revealed that the crabs were high in prestic acid, a dangerous chemical. But a marked decline in the number of goldfish found by the beach has led to the removal of the warning signs.

Premise: High prestic Acid in Hermit crab =>People got sick => Caution signs against Hermit Crabs
Conclusion: Decline in GF => Removal of signs.

Now how does conclusion is linked with premise in the stimulus , is what we have to answer .Because conclusion mentions GF and premise mentions HC.So there must be some relation between GF and prestic acid.

Which of the following, if true, would best explain the removal of the signs?

Goldfish found off Rotunda Beach cause hermit crabs to excrete prestic acid.
This shows that signs shouldn't be removed because GF decline =>HC will less excrete prestic acid => People Sick
The amount of prestic acid produced by an individual goldfish has a direct positive correlation with the density of the goldfish population in that goldfish’s immediate vicinity.
If Density of GF directly proportional to the Prestic acid , the according to conclusion
GF decline => Density of GF declines => Less Prestic acid => HC safe =>People will not get sick => Removal of signs.

Goldfish consume various parasites that often contain prestic acid.
Out of scope, we talking about Acid not parasites
Rotunda Beach is notoriously polluted.
Out of scope
Goldfish would not be able to inhabit the waters off Rotunda Beach if those waters were not saturated with a precise mixture of acids, including prestic acid.
Not related to argument

Hope it helps !!!

Why are A and B different?
Less prestic acid => HC safe? No. Less prestic acid => HC will less excrete prestic acid. Just like your reasoning in A. So which one is correct?
Senior Manager
Joined: 28 Apr 2014
Posts: 291
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 46

Re: After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Jul 2014, 23:54
umeshpatil wrote:
IMO: A
Premise 1: Eating the hermit crabs, fishermen got sick. So, Authorities displayed warning sign to forbid from eating crabs.
Premise 2: Crabs were acidic chemical prestic acid.
Conclusion: Authorities removed warning signal knowing decline in the goldfish population.

A) Goldfish found off Rotunda Beach cause hermit crabs to excrete prestic acid. Fishermen got sick by eating crab, whose excreta was acidic because of presence of goldfish around. Its good correlation. Now, As goldfish population has declined, it's correct to assume, crabs will not excrete prestic acid.
B) The amount of prestic acid produced by an individual goldfish has a direct positive correlation with the density of the goldfish population in that goldfish’s immediate vicinity. Prestic acid is proportional to goldfish population? then why fishermen felt sick by eating crab. They didn't eat goldfish. Wrong. No correlation with hermit crabs.
C) Goldfish consume various parasites that often contain prestic acid. Same error as B.
D) Rotunda Beach is notoriously polluted. Out of scope. Pollution has no interrelation with crabs and fishes.
E) Goldfish would not be able to inhabit the waters off Rotunda Beach if those waters were not saturated with a precise mixture of acids, including prestic acid. Same error as B,C

I am not convinced with OA. Can anyone please put light on this ?

I agree with your point. How is B in anyway related to crabs
Intern
Joined: 09 Jan 2014
Posts: 16
GMAT Date: 05-28-2015
GPA: 3.48
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 26

Re: After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2014, 11:59
himanshujovi wrote:
umeshpatil wrote:
IMO: A
Premise 1: Eating the hermit crabs, fishermen got sick. So, Authorities displayed warning sign to forbid from eating crabs.
Premise 2: Crabs were acidic chemical prestic acid.
Conclusion: Authorities removed warning signal knowing decline in the goldfish population.

A) Goldfish found off Rotunda Beach cause hermit crabs to excrete prestic acid. Fishermen got sick by eating crab, whose excreta was acidic because of presence of goldfish around. Its good correlation. Now, As goldfish population has declined, it's correct to assume, crabs will not excrete prestic acid.
B) The amount of prestic acid produced by an individual goldfish has a direct positive correlation with the density of the goldfish population in that goldfish’s immediate vicinity. Prestic acid is proportional to goldfish population? then why fishermen felt sick by eating crab. They didn't eat goldfish. Wrong. No correlation with hermit crabs.
C) Goldfish consume various parasites that often contain prestic acid. Same error as B.
D) Rotunda Beach is notoriously polluted. Out of scope. Pollution has no interrelation with crabs and fishes.
E) Goldfish would not be able to inhabit the waters off Rotunda Beach if those waters were not saturated with a precise mixture of acids, including prestic acid. Same error as B,C

I am not convinced with OA. Can anyone please put light on this ?

I agree with your point. How is B in anyway related to crabs

First of all lets see why A is incorrect. According to this statement, more goldfish => more excretion of prestic acid(ie less retention). Thus if goldfish population declines retention of prestic acid in hermit crabs will increase and thus the danger is still there.

We can easily eliminate C & D as they are out of scope.

Now both B & E are assuming that prestic acid content in water is directly proportional to the acid content in crab. But E goes too far to say that "goldfish would not be able to inhabit at all" while the argument just mentions that the goldfish population has just declined.

hence (B) is correct
Manager
Joined: 20 Jul 2013
Posts: 63
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 57 [0], given: 57

Re: After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 Aug 2014, 02:38
himanshujovi wrote:
umeshpatil wrote:
IMO: A
Premise 1: Eating the hermit crabs, fishermen got sick. So, Authorities displayed warning sign to forbid from eating crabs.
Premise 2: Crabs were acidic chemical prestic acid.
Conclusion: Authorities removed warning signal knowing decline in the goldfish population.

A) Goldfish found off Rotunda Beach cause hermit crabs to excrete prestic acid. Fishermen got sick by eating crab, whose excreta was acidic because of presence of goldfish around. Its good correlation. Now, As goldfish population has declined, it's correct to assume, crabs will not excrete prestic acid.
B) The amount of prestic acid produced by an individual goldfish has a direct positive correlation with the density of the goldfish population in that goldfish’s immediate vicinity. Prestic acid is proportional to goldfish population? then why fishermen felt sick by eating crab. They didn't eat goldfish. Wrong. No correlation with hermit crabs.
C) Goldfish consume various parasites that often contain prestic acid. Same error as B.
D) Rotunda Beach is notoriously polluted. Out of scope. Pollution has no interrelation with crabs and fishes.
E) Goldfish would not be able to inhabit the waters off Rotunda Beach if those waters were not saturated with a precise mixture of acids, including prestic acid. Same error as B,C

I am not convinced with OA. Can anyone please put light on this ?

I agree with your point. How is B in anyway related to crabs

Well, first off, let's review the argument:

The purpose of the signs was to prevent people from eating the crabs, which were high in prestic acid.
Removing the signs implies that the crabs are no longer high in prestic acid ~ hence, safe to eat.
Now, the only change has been the decline in the number of goldfish ... So --- there has to be a link between the number of goldfish and the amount of prestic acid from the crabs.

Choice B tells us: Less goldfish = Less Prestic Acid ======> meaning, crabs are now safe to eat.
Manager
Joined: 22 Aug 2014
Posts: 204
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 49

After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach [#permalink]

### Show Tags

28 Apr 2015, 07:55
TGC wrote:
After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach pier got sick from consuming locally fished hermit crabs, the Rotunda Beach city authorities posted signs cautioning against the consumption of the crabs. Tests revealed that the crabs were high in prestic acid, a dangerous chemical. But a marked decline in the number of goldfish found by the beach has led to the removal of the warning signs.

Which of the following, if true, would best explain the removal of the signs?

Goldfish found off Rotunda Beach cause hermit crabs to excrete prestic acid.
The amount of prestic acid produced by an individual goldfish has a direct positive correlation with the density of the goldfish population in that goldfish’s immediate vicinity.
Goldfish consume various parasites that often contain prestic acid.
Rotunda Beach is notoriously polluted.
Goldfish would not be able to inhabit the waters off Rotunda Beach if those waters were not saturated with a precise mixture of acids, including prestic acid.
Source: Veri Prep

I think B is not best among the answer choices.
In B we are taking an assumption that Crabs are in the vicinity of Goldfish.It may be a condition where Goldfish reside on east shore and crabs on west shore.
In A ,we are directly told that goldfish is responsible for excretion of prestic acid in crabs so it satisfies both premises.I think A is more appropriate than B.
Can anyone still explain why B is correct? KyleWiddison tuanquang269
mikemcgarry ,I need your help here !
GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 9134
Followers: 797

Kudos [?]: 164 [0], given: 0

Re: After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 May 2016, 06:05
Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.
Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2015
Posts: 89
GPA: 3.9
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 17 [0], given: 74

Re: After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 May 2016, 23:39
TGC wrote:
After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach pier got sick from consuming locally fished hermit crabs, the Rotunda Beach city authorities posted signs cautioning against the consumption of the crabs. Tests revealed that the crabs were high in prestic acid, a dangerous chemical. But a marked decline in the number of goldfish found by the beach has led to the removal of the warning signs.

Which of the following, if true, would best explain the removal of the signs?

Goldfish found off Rotunda Beach cause hermit crabs to excrete prestic acid.
The amount of prestic acid produced by an individual goldfish has a direct positive correlation with the density of the goldfish population in that goldfish’s immediate vicinity.
Goldfish consume various parasites that often contain prestic acid.
Rotunda Beach is notoriously polluted.
Goldfish would not be able to inhabit the waters off Rotunda Beach if those waters were not saturated with a precise mixture of acids, including prestic acid.
Source: Veri Prep

First and foremost we must not assume hermit crabs secrete prestic acid. That's a trap. They contain high amounts of prestic acid but it may be because the water itself is polluted with prestic acid because of external causes.
Option B tells us that gold fish generate prestic acid and decrease in its density reduces the concentration prestic acid. This option directly reduces the concentration of prestic acid in water and so crabs are now edible.

Hope this helps. !!
Manager
Joined: 14 May 2014
Posts: 61
Schools: Mannheim"17
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 256

After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach [#permalink]

### Show Tags

16 May 2016, 00:10
TGC wrote:
After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach pier got sick from consuming locally fished hermit crabs, the Rotunda Beach city authorities posted signs cautioning against the consumption of the crabs. Tests revealed that the crabs were high in prestic acid, a dangerous chemical. But a marked decline in the number of goldfish found by the beach has led to the removal of the warning signs.

Which of the following, if true, would best explain the removal of the signs?

>>Goldfish found off Rotunda Beach cause hermit crabs to excrete prestic acid.
>>The amount of prestic acid produced by an individual goldfish has a direct positive correlation with the density of the goldfish population in that goldfish’s immediate vicinity.
>> Goldfish would not be able to inhabit the waters off Rotunda Beach if those waters were not saturated with a precise mixture of acids, including prestic acid.

A very good question. Works on prethinking and correlation
Crabs have acid inside them and people are getting sick eating the acid inside the crab

Prethink--how is goldfish related to crab
assumed-> crab eats goldfish

question--> If crab eats goldfish, why has officers remove the caution that crabs are harmful??
crabs eat goldfish// farmers eat crabs--> population of crabs is maintained

If farmers wont eat crabs--> more crabs and thus less goldfish

Only B says this.
After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach   [#permalink] 16 May 2016, 00:10
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
1 #Top150 CR: After a number of migrant fishermen at the Rotunda Beach 5 12 Oct 2015, 07:47
17 Last year, after the number of subway riders who had had their pockets 23 27 Jan 2011, 07:18
During the month of May, crabs arrive on Delaware's beaches 9 09 Jan 2009, 17:45
14 During the month of May, crabs arrive on Delaware's beaches 10 09 Jan 2009, 17:45
During the month of May, crabs arrive on Delaware s beaches 3 02 Nov 2006, 22:14
Display posts from previous: Sort by