Quote:
1. The complexity of the shark has been underestimated for which of the following reasons?
This problem follows GMAC's convention of testing statements from the passage
directly if the question does NOT contain "infer", "imply", or "suggest".
We therefore need to go find 'complexity' in the passage. That's in the second paragraph; I've put the REASONS (that we're seeking here) in bold underline:
because sharks are so difficult to study—they are dangerous, far-ranging, and usually inhabit murky waters—scientists only recently have accumulated enough data to even hint at their behavioral and sensory complexity"Dangerous" is option II. "Live in waters that aren't clear" (murky is the opposite of clear) is option III.
There's nothing to suggest option I—and, moreover, option I is absurd (an animal's evolutionary age doesn't make it harder or easier to study!).
It's D.
Quote:
2. It can be inferred from the passage that female sharks hiding in groups from male sharks
The word "inferred" means that the answer is NOT going to be a direct restatement of a fact from the passage. The answer should be
equivalent to a piece of given information, but should appear in some sort of 'flipped' / logically transformed form (e.g., passage says "My brother is taller than me" —> INFER: e.g., "I'm shorter than my brother", or "if an object is hanging low enough to hit my head when I walk under it, the same object will also hit my brother if he walks under it".)
We need to go find
female sharks hiding in groups from male sharks. Where is that?
It's at the very end of the passage:
unreceptive females, perhaps already pregnant, may use electroreception to locate other buried females to hide from amorous males in buried aggregationNothing here is a 'flipped' version of any of this information, so let's do a process of elimination:
A. could not be found if they were buried in the sand. —> This is CONTRADICTED by the passage, which states that 'unreceptive' (e.g., pregnant) female sharks CAN find other females buried in the sand.
B. could be discovered by a male shark using his “third eye.” —> The "third eye" senses LIGHT—i.e., like normal vision but much more sensitive. This won't be of any use in locating sharks that are
buried and therefore OUT OF SIGHT.
C. would emit no bioelectrical signals. —> This CONTRADICTS the passage—at least twice, actually. (The target part of the passage states that females find other buried females using electroreception, which senses bioelectrical signals. Also, a little earlier—in ¶4—the passage states that ALL live organisms emit [weak] bioelectrical signals.)
D. would be easier to detect by electroreception than a female shark hiding alone.—>
This is the correct answer, because it's the only one that doesn't contradict the passage. (:
Please note that
this correct answer is deficient by GMAC's standards, because the passage does not EXPLICITLY say or prove that multiple animals' bioelectrical signals ADD UP, which we need to establish this answer choice. (The description of packs open to mating as "highly visible" hints in this direction, but 'hinting in the right direction' isn't good enough for GMAC.)
E. would open their mouths as often as possible.
—> This also CONTRADICTS the passage, which states:
Field strength intensifies when the fishes open their mouths. Literally, “heavy breathing” could enhance a female’s attraction. The buried females are hiding because they are NOT open to attraction and DON'T want to give themselves away to males.
Last 2 questions in next post.