The pesticide Azocide, introduced to central valley farms

Actually, upon re-reading my analysis, I think I went wrong with C. I now prefer B because it is shorter and more concise than C. C has an inappropriate use of verb tense have been.

This question got me first. I and kpadma discussed about it and this is what came out.

B should be answer. I dont want to discuss about other choices. The only contenders are B and C. Now How do we choose B over C. The key is
"due to" and "because"

It is preferable to say the following
The concert was cancelled because of rain
over
The concert was cancelled due to rain.

"due to" is used as follows

The cancellation of concert was due to the rain

due to should only be used as a complement (i.e., after a be-verb)


I hope B is right.

What is the grammatical error in choice E, other than being wordy?

Sorry for the wrong header for the topic. It is SC question.

The question id from businessweek.com website.

I also chose B as my answer. But the official answer is C.

Here are my thoughts about B and C:

Choice B: With choice B, the sentence becomes as follows:

The pesticide Azocide has proven ineffective because of the chemical compositions of the pesticides already in wide use neutralizing its desired effect.

More simplyfying version: Something has proven ineffective because of some other thing neutralizing its desired effect.

Choice C : With choice C the sentence becoms as follows:

The pesticide Azocide has proven ineffective due to other pesticides already in wide use, whose chemical compositions have been neutralizing its desired effect.

Simplified version: Something has proven ineffective due to some other thing, whose chemical composition have been neutralizing its desired effect.

My questions:

(1) Can the word "whose" be used for "things"? The only reason I choice B over C was the use of "whose" in C.

(2) After looking at the simplified versions above, which one do you find more compelling?

These questions are hard to crack!
Did the businessweek forum reveal the source of the question?

I don't see any meaning shift in answer choice B. Then again,
sometimes, I'm the last to notice these subtle differences.

Anyone care to explain further?

It was not posted on the businessweek forum but on Businessweek's website, there are few sample questions. This queation is one of them:

https://www.businessweek.com/bschools/gmat/practice.htm


Also browse through the LINK section of this forum. It has many links that contain good practice questions.

A is wrong because it refers to compositions in wide use, not pesticides; also it is a sentence fragment.
B is wrong because the ineffectiveness is not caused by the "chemical compositions" of pesticides in wide use, but rather by the of "pesticides" in wide use. i.e., IMO the "wide use" should be emphasized rather than the "chemical composition" as the culprit.
C correct states that the problem is due to the wide use of the other pesticides -- explaining further that the chemical compositions of those pesticides have been neutralizing the effect.
D is wrong because it does not carry the implication that the "wide" use of the other pesticides is the crux of the problem
E is wrong for the same reason as above.

In my opinion option B is the most logical one.