It is currently 22 Nov 2017, 17:35

### 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

# A new species of fish has just been discovered living in

Author Message
Manager
Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Posts: 179

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 17

A new species of fish has just been discovered living in [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2010, 10:03
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

25% (01:47) correct 75% (01:56) wrong based on 8 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

A new species of fish has just been discovered living in great numbers in the waters off Papua New Guinea. The fish exhibits some characteristics belonging to sharks, such as a cartilaginous skeleton. However, the fish also exhibits characteristics belonging to eels, such as a long, snake-like body. Because of the habitat where it was found and its obviously eel-like body, almost all scientists believe that the fish is an eel. But the cartilaginous skeleton puzzles them, since no known eel possesses one. So scientists are still unsure as to the fish's precise classification, but they agreed immediately that the most logical classification would be as either a shark or an eel.

The statements above, if true, most strongly support which of the following?

A. To be placed into a certain classification, a fish must possess all the characteristics of that classification.
B. Physical characteristics, such as skeletons, are scientists' primary means of classifying new species.
C. Some fish with cartilaginous skeletons are not sharks.
D. The waters off Papua New Guinea are generally hospitable to eels.
E. A fish cannot be both a shark and an eel.

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 17

Current Student
Affiliations: ?
Joined: 20 Jul 2009
Posts: 191

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 6

Location: Africa/Europe
Schools: Kellogg; Ross (\$\$); Tuck
Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2010, 11:00
I would go with E.

A is wrong to me because it talks about "ALL" characteristics
B wrong as the statements do not talk about the "primary mean" of classification.
C and D out...

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 6

Intern
Joined: 26 May 2010
Posts: 10

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

Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2010, 17:12
Do you have the correct answer to it?
Coz i think B seems more likely, E doesn't appear to be the best because the passage doesn't tell us anything about whether a fish can be both a shark and an eel, even if we've known this all along?
Hope this can help!

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

Intern
Joined: 11 Apr 2010
Posts: 47

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 9

Concentration: Marketing, Strategy
Schools: Indian School of Business (ISB) - Class of 2013
GMAT 1: 730 Q49 V41
WE: Other (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2010, 18:23
Is the answer D? It seems to be the option best supported by the sentence "because of the habitat and...".
E comes close too because of the conclusion "either a shark or an eel".

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 9

Manager
Joined: 30 Jun 2004
Posts: 176

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 5

Location: Singapore
Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2010, 20:29
This is a close one between B and E as there is strong support for both.

What role do "precise classification" and "logical classification" play? Can we assume there may be some generic classification also under which the fish may be both, a shark and a eel.

This creates doubt againt E.

Whereas there is no such doubt that physical characteristics are primary means of classification.

I will go with B.

What's the OA?

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 5

Intern
Joined: 29 Mar 2010
Posts: 15

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 1

Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2010, 20:37
This question is asking for an Inference.

"E" would be the best option IMO.
In "B" the use of "primary" is extreme.

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 1

Manager
Joined: 24 May 2010
Posts: 65

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 4

Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2010, 21:44
IMO E. What is the OA?

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 4

Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 415

Kudos [?]: 145 [0], given: 16

Schools: UT at Austin, Indiana State University, UC at Berkeley
WE 1: 5.5
WE 2: 5.5
WE 3: 6.0
Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2010, 21:52
IMO E
_________________

Never give up,,,

Kudos [?]: 145 [0], given: 16

Manager
Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Posts: 179

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 17

Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2010, 22:20
mirzohidjon wrote:
IMO E

Guys E is not the right answer, Ravi can you jump in? OA will follow soon

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 17

Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 415

Kudos [?]: 145 [0], given: 16

Schools: UT at Austin, Indiana State University, UC at Berkeley
WE 1: 5.5
WE 2: 5.5
WE 3: 6.0
Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2010, 22:40
Now, I see that answer needs to be C

The sentence "But the cartilaginous skeleton puzzles them, since no known eel possesses one." is key to my response.
_________________

Never give up,,,

Kudos [?]: 145 [0], given: 16

Manager
Joined: 24 May 2010
Posts: 65

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 4

Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2010, 22:49
mirzohidjon wrote:
Now, I see that answer needs to be C

The sentence "But the cartilaginous skeleton puzzles them, since no known eel possesses one." is key to my response.

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 4

Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 415

Kudos [?]: 145 [2], given: 16

Schools: UT at Austin, Indiana State University, UC at Berkeley
WE 1: 5.5
WE 2: 5.5
WE 3: 6.0
Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2010, 23:09
2
KUDOS
mrik wrote:
mirzohidjon wrote:
Now, I see that answer needs to be C

The sentence "But the cartilaginous skeleton puzzles them, since no known eel possesses one." is key to my response.

In order to come to the answer C, I used POE (point of exclusion):

A new species of fish has just been discovered living in great numbers in the waters off Papua New Guinea. The fish exhibits some characteristics belonging to sharks, such as a cartilaginous skeleton. However, the fish also exhibits characteristics belonging to eels, such as a long, snake-like body. Because of the habitat where it was found and its obviously eel-like body, almost all scientists believe that the fish is an eel. But the cartilaginous skeleton puzzles them, since no known eel possesses one. So scientists are still unsure as to the fish's precise classification, but they agreed immediately that the most logical classification would be as either a shark or an eel.

The statements above, if true, most strongly support which of the following?

A. To be placed into a certain classification, a fish must possess all the characteristics of that classification.
The wording that "all the characteristics of that classification must be meet to be placed into certain classification" makes the choice extreme, as nowhere in the text it is mentioned that it needs to meet all requirements to be classified into certain group.

B. Physical characteristics, such as skeletons, are scientists' primary means of classifying new species.
No, mentioning of primary or secondary means of classifying new species. The answer is making its own conclusion not based on text

C. Some fish with cartilaginous skeletons are not sharks.
The phrase "since no known eel possesses one." is key to my answer. it implies that some other animals might have cartilaginous skeleton but not eel. If no animal but sharks only had cartilaginous skeleton, the text would clearly state that. But we do not see it in the text. Thus, C needs to be the correct answer.

D. The waters off Papua New Guinea are generally hospitable to eels.
I did not take this option seriously, because the fact that eel live in specific area, which we imply from the text does not necessarily mean the area is hospitable to them. it is very much possible that simply because of their tough fighting against nature's inconveniences eel are managing to live in New Guinea.

E. A fish cannot be both a shark and an eel.
First, I chose this one as the correct answer, as I thought the phrase "as either a shark or an eel" implied that fish can not be both shark and eel. However, upon deeper thinking , I realized that what if some sharks do not have cartilaginous skeletons and they have characteristics of eel. Then fish could be both shark and eel. So the answer is extreme, in my opinion.
Hope it helps.
_________________

Never give up,,,

Kudos [?]: 145 [2], given: 16

Manager
Joined: 24 May 2010
Posts: 65

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 4

Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 May 2010, 23:11
Thanks for explaining +1

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 4

Manager
Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Posts: 179

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 17

Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 May 2010, 21:50
mirzohidjon wrote:
mrik wrote:
mirzohidjon wrote:
Now, I see that answer needs to be C

The sentence "But the cartilaginous skeleton puzzles them, since no known eel possesses one." is key to my response.

In order to come to the answer C, I used POE (point of exclusion):

A new species of fish has just been discovered living in great numbers in the waters off Papua New Guinea. The fish exhibits some characteristics belonging to sharks, such as a cartilaginous skeleton. However, the fish also exhibits characteristics belonging to eels, such as a long, snake-like body. Because of the habitat where it was found and its obviously eel-like body, almost all scientists believe that the fish is an eel. But the cartilaginous skeleton puzzles them, since no known eel possesses one. So scientists are still unsure as to the fish's precise classification, but they agreed immediately that the most logical classification would be as either a shark or an eel.

The statements above, if true, most strongly support which of the following?

A. To be placed into a certain classification, a fish must possess all the characteristics of that classification.
The wording that "all the characteristics of that classification must be meet to be placed into certain classification" makes the choice extreme, as nowhere in the text it is mentioned that it needs to meet all requirements to be classified into certain group.

B. Physical characteristics, such as skeletons, are scientists' primary means of classifying new species.
No, mentioning of primary or secondary means of classifying new species. The answer is making its own conclusion not based on text

C. Some fish with cartilaginous skeletons are not sharks.
The phrase "since no known eel possesses one." is key to my answer. it implies that some other animals might have cartilaginous skeleton but not eel. If no animal but sharks only had cartilaginous skeleton, the text would clearly state that. But we do not see it in the text. Thus, C needs to be the correct answer.

D. The waters off Papua New Guinea are generally hospitable to eels.
I did not take this option seriously, because the fact that eel live in specific area, which we imply from the text does not necessarily mean the area is hospitable to them. it is very much possible that simply because of their tough fighting against nature's inconveniences eel are managing to live in New Guinea.

E. A fish cannot be both a shark and an eel.
First, I chose this one as the correct answer, as I thought the phrase "as either a shark or an eel" implied that fish can not be both shark and eel. However, upon deeper thinking , I realized that what if some sharks do not have cartilaginous skeletons and they have characteristics of eel. Then fish could be both shark and eel. So the answer is extreme, in my opinion.
Hope it helps.

guys the OA is D, and this question is from Kaplan test series.

Kudos [?]: 34 [0], given: 17

Manager
Joined: 24 May 2010
Posts: 65

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 4

Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 May 2010, 21:55
How is it D. Any explanations ?

Kudos [?]: 22 [0], given: 4

Director
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 925

Kudos [?]: 1549 [0], given: 40

WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 May 2010, 23:03
Great efforts. +1. But the OA has to be D.

There is a paradox on the type of fish. So, we cant have a concrete opininon on the fish classification, because it possess both the features. If you have noticed that the first sentence and 4th sentence:
Because of the habitat where it was found and its obviously eel-like body, almost all scientists believe that the fish is an eel.

These two parts coincides with the statement in D. Rest are irrelevent or opposite choices.

mirzohidjon wrote:
mrik wrote:
mirzohidjon wrote:
Now, I see that answer needs to be C

The sentence "But the cartilaginous skeleton puzzles them, since no known eel possesses one." is key to my response.

In order to come to the answer C, I used POE (point of exclusion):

A new species of fish has just been discovered living in great numbers in the waters off Papua New Guinea. The fish exhibits some characteristics belonging to sharks, such as a cartilaginous skeleton. However, the fish also exhibits characteristics belonging to eels, such as a long, snake-like body. Because of the habitat where it was found and its obviously eel-like body, almost all scientists believe that the fish is an eel. But the cartilaginous skeleton puzzles them, since no known eel possesses one. So scientists are still unsure as to the fish's precise classification, but they agreed immediately that the most logical classification would be as either a shark or an eel.

The statements above, if true, most strongly support which of the following?

A. To be placed into a certain classification, a fish must possess all the characteristics of that classification.
The wording that "all the characteristics of that classification must be meet to be placed into certain classification" makes the choice extreme, as nowhere in the text it is mentioned that it needs to meet all requirements to be classified into certain group.

B. Physical characteristics, such as skeletons, are scientists' primary means of classifying new species.
No, mentioning of primary or secondary means of classifying new species. The answer is making its own conclusion not based on text

C. Some fish with cartilaginous skeletons are not sharks.
The phrase "since no known eel possesses one." is key to my answer. it implies that some other animals might have cartilaginous skeleton but not eel. If no animal but sharks only had cartilaginous skeleton, the text would clearly state that. But we do not see it in the text. Thus, C needs to be the correct answer.

D. The waters off Papua New Guinea are generally hospitable to eels.
I did not take this option seriously, because the fact that eel live in specific area, which we imply from the text does not necessarily mean the area is hospitable to them. it is very much possible that simply because of their tough fighting against nature's inconveniences eel are managing to live in New Guinea.

E. A fish cannot be both a shark and an eel.
First, I chose this one as the correct answer, as I thought the phrase "as either a shark or an eel" implied that fish can not be both shark and eel. However, upon deeper thinking , I realized that what if some sharks do not have cartilaginous skeletons and they have characteristics of eel. Then fish could be both shark and eel. So the answer is extreme, in my opinion.
Hope it helps.

_________________

Tricky Quant problems: http://gmatclub.com/forum/50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: http://gmatclub.com/forum/key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html

Kudos [?]: 1549 [0], given: 40

Senior Manager
Joined: 18 Aug 2009
Posts: 415

Kudos [?]: 145 [0], given: 16

Schools: UT at Austin, Indiana State University, UC at Berkeley
WE 1: 5.5
WE 2: 5.5
WE 3: 6.0
Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Jun 2010, 19:34
Answer D may fall apart by the following explanation, I provided:

D. The waters off Papua New Guinea are generally hospitable to eels.
I did not take this option seriously, because the fact that eel live in specific area, which we imply from the text does not necessarily mean the area is hospitable to them. it is very much possible that simply because of their tough fighting against nature's inconveniences eel are managing to live in New Guinea. EEl could survive that area, even the waters are not hospitable to them. U can not conclude that from the stem given.
_________________

Never give up,,,

Kudos [?]: 145 [0], given: 16

Manager
Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 64

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 3

Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2010, 00:12
In must be true questions, the information given in the argument is always considered to be true and the answers are suspect. On basis of argument, one has to find an directly flowing answer.

Lets consider options:-

a)A. To be placed into a certain classification, a fish must possess all the characteristics of that classification
(no where in ques it is written that all characteristics are prerequisite for classification, so this ans is wrong)

b)Physical characteristics, such as skeletons, are scientists' primary means of classifying new species.
(This option falls apart because if skeletons are primary means that fish must be shark, but in argument scientists are confused whether fish is shark or eel)

c)Some fish with cartilaginous skeletons are not sharks.(simple, out of scope as no information about this is given in argument.)

d)The waters off Papua New Guinea are generally hospitable to eels.(CORRECT because argument specifically talks about the habitat where fish was found and its obviously eel-like body, almost all scientists believe that the fish is an eel. Clearly shows that habitat aids to eel's existence).

e)A fish cannot be both a shark and an eel.(this is wrong becoz if a fish can be classified as both then scientists would not have been confused.)

IF you like the explanation kindly award KUDOS :)

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 3

Director
Joined: 25 Aug 2007
Posts: 925

Kudos [?]: 1549 [0], given: 40

WE 1: 3.5 yrs IT
WE 2: 2.5 yrs Retail chain
Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2010, 04:50
I doubt whether the stimulus confirms the fish as eel or shark, for certainity.
But, except D none is suitable as per the context. There is no mention/indication on:
1. Fighting among fish
2. Fish survival

So, only D survives.

mirzohidjon wrote:
Answer D may fall apart by the following explanation, I provided:

D. The waters off Papua New Guinea are generally hospitable to eels.
I did not take this option seriously, because the fact that eel live in specific area, which we imply from the text does not necessarily mean the area is hospitable to them. it is very much possible that simply because of their tough fighting against nature's inconveniences eel are managing to live in New Guinea. EEl could survive that area, even the waters are not hospitable to them. U can not conclude that from the stem given.

_________________

Tricky Quant problems: http://gmatclub.com/forum/50-tricky-questions-92834.html
Important Grammer Fundamentals: http://gmatclub.com/forum/key-fundamentals-of-grammer-our-crucial-learnings-on-sc-93659.html

Kudos [?]: 1549 [0], given: 40

Manager
Joined: 22 Jun 2007
Posts: 72

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 1

Re: Q from kaplan test series [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Jun 2010, 19:49
ykaiim wrote:
I doubt whether the stimulus confirms the fish as eel or shark, for certainity.
But, except D none is suitable as per the context. There is no mention/indication on:
1. Fighting among fish
2. Fish survival

So, only D survives.

mirzohidjon wrote:
Answer D may fall apart by the following explanation, I provided:

D. The waters off Papua New Guinea are generally hospitable to eels.
I did not take this option seriously, because the fact that eel live in specific area, which we imply from the text does not necessarily mean the area is hospitable to them. it is very much possible that simply because of their tough fighting against nature's inconveniences eel are managing to live in New Guinea. EEl could survive that area, even the waters are not hospitable to them. U can not conclude that from the stem given.

@ykaiim

I agree to your explnation and to the OA 'D'.

But can you please give more explanation how can we eliminate E.

Kudos [?]: 6 [0], given: 1

Re: Q from kaplan test series   [#permalink] 03 Jun 2010, 19:49

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 23 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# A new species of fish has just been discovered living in

Moderators: GMATNinjaTwo, GMATNinja

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.