Swagatalakshmi wrote:
The popular notion that a tree's age can be determined by counting the number of internal rings in its trunk is generally true. However, to help regulate the internal temperature of the tree, the outermost layers of wood of the Brazilian ash often peel away when the temperature exceeds 95 degrees Fahrenheit, leaving the tree with fewer rings than it would otherwise have. So if the temperature in the Brazilian ash's environment never exceeded 95 degrees Fahrenheit, its rings would be a reliable measure of the tree's age.
Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument above depends?
(A) The growth of new rings in a tree is not a function of levels of precipitation.
(B) Only the Brazilian ash loses rings because of excessive heat.
(C) Only one day of temperatures above 95 degrees Fahrenheit is needed to cause the Brazilian ash to lose a ring.
(D) The internal rings of all trees are of uniform thickness.
(E) The number of rings that will be lost when the temperature exceeds 95 degrees Fahrenheit is not predictable
I am somewhere among A, C and E
In E: Probably it does not matter whether we know the the number of rings lost when temperature exceeds 95 degrees. If we knew, say, teh tree loses 1 ring when the temp exceeds 95 degrees. we do not know how many days was the temperature over 95 degrees during the tree's lifetime (since we do not know tree's ag eto begin with)
A: I don't think we are really concerned about how the rings grow. The concern is how the rings can decrease
By POE, C seems to be the choice though it is a little strong because of the usage of
only.
The information in the paragraph says: So if the temperature in the Brazilian ash's environment
never exceeded 95 degrees Fahrenheit, its rings would be a reliable measure of the tree's age. Usage of never seems to indicate that if the temperature is over 95 degrees on even 1 day, then the tree should at least lose 1 ring.