Quote:
Since 1945 pesticide use in the United Stares has increased tenfold despite an overall stability in number of acres planted. During the same period, crop loss from insects has approximately doubled, from about seven to thirteen percent.
Which one of the following, if true, contributes most to explaining the paradoxical findings above?
(A) Extension agents employed by state governments to advise farmers have recently advocated using smaller amounts of pesticide, though in past years they promoted heavy pesticide use.
(B) While pesticide-resistant strains of insects were developing, crop rotation, which for insects disrupts a stable food supply, was gradually abandoned because farmers' eligibility to receive government crop subsidies depended on continuing to plant the same crop.
(C) Since 1970 the pesticides most lethal to people have generally been replaced by less-lethal chemicals that are equally effective against insects and have a less-damaging effect on the fish in streams fed by water that runs off from treated agricultural fields.
(D) Because farmers' decisions about how much land to plant are governed by their expectations about crop prices at harvest time, the amount of pesticide they apply also depends in part on expected crop prices.
(E) Although some pesticides can be removed from foodstuffs through washing, others are taken up into the edible portion of plants, and consumers have begun to boycott foods containing pesticides that cannot be washed off.
The right answer here should be
B. This question is asking us to resolve the paradox, so we must first identify exactly what that paradox is. In this case, it is that pesticide use has increased, but pests have still killed more crops. So we need an explanation that suggests how insects could still attack more crops. Remember that it's already established that use of pesticides is higher and number of acres planted is the same, so we cannot suggest otherwise.
A - It doesn't matter that this was promoted, since we know that use of pesticides has still gone up.
OUTB - The diminishing use of crop rotation is a possible reason for increase in insects, so this explains how insects could eat more crops despite increased pesticides.
CORRECTC - If this is true, it actually deepens the paradox. This should lead to less crop loss, not explain why more happened.
OUTD - This talks about amount of pesticide used, but we already know that it increased.
OUTE - Consumer boycotts should lead to lower use of pesticides. But, as we know, it did not drop. So this is irrelevant.
OUT - Matoo