GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

It is currently 10 Dec 2018, 19:18

Close

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
Your Progress

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

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel
Events & Promotions in December
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
2526272829301
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
303112345
Open Detailed Calendar
  • Free lesson on number properties

     December 10, 2018

     December 10, 2018

     10:00 PM PST

     11:00 PM PST

    Practice the one most important Quant section - Integer properties, and rapidly improve your skills.
  • Free GMAT Prep Hour

     December 11, 2018

     December 11, 2018

     09:00 PM EST

     10:00 PM EST

    Strategies and techniques for approaching featured GMAT topics. December 11 at 9 PM EST.

A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

SVP
SVP
avatar
Joined: 24 Sep 2005
Posts: 1787
A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post Updated on: 17 Oct 2018, 02:33
11
34
00:00
A
B
C
D
E

Difficulty:

  55% (hard)

Question Stats:

57% (01:01) correct 43% (01:01) wrong based on 3629 sessions

HideShow timer Statistics

A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.


(A) that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing

(B) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in

(C) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing

(D) creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in

(E) creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing


Verbal Question of The Day: Day 34: Sentence Correction


Subscribe to GMAT Question of the Day: E-mail | RSS
For All QOTD Questions Click Here


Spoiler: :: nytimes article
https://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/01/science/the-diverse-creatures-of-the-deep-may-be-starving.html

Hordes of creatures living in the hidden depths of the deep sea are in danger of starving to death, scientists report. This remote part of the planet is believed to harbor millions of undiscovered species, an unknown number of which may be in crisis.

A study of food supply and demand miles down in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 found that creatures of the seabed suffered from growing food shortages. A likely culprit, scientists say, is a documented increase in sea surface temperatures during the same period.

''If the food deficit continues, it is going to change the configuration of the deep-sea communities,'' said Kenneth L. Smith Jr., a biologist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography in San Diego and a co-author of the report, which was published recently in Science. ''Some species will die out while those that can survive on a very low food supply will still be able to maintain themselves.''

Originally posted by laxieqv on 09 Dec 2005, 19:24.
Last edited by Bunuel on 17 Oct 2018, 02:33, edited 2 times in total.
Renamed the topic and edited the question.
Most Helpful Expert Reply
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
User avatar
P
Status: GMAT and GRE tutor
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Posts: 2141
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Re: QOTD: A study of food resources in the North Pacific  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 15 Jun 2017, 09:47
11
6
Quote:
A: that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly a result from increasing

I don't love the “a result from increasing” at the end of the sentence. “A result of” is the correct idiom. But if you don’t feel certain about that idiom… well, read this article about idioms, maybe. And then look for other stuff.

The more important thing: logically, the first part of the underlined sentence doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. The creatures weren’t suffering from “dwindling food supplies.” Sure, they were suffering because the supplies were dwindling, but they weren’t suffering from the supplies themselves. Food supplies don’t make you suffer. Eliminate (A).

Quote:
B: that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in

Nice, this seems to fix exactly the problems described in (A). Let’s keep (B).

Quote:
C: that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing

Same problem as (A): creatures weren’t suffering because of the food supplies. Food supplies are awesome, and don’t cause suffering. :banana:

Quote:
D: creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in

We actually need the word “that” at the beginning of the underlined portion in this case. Without it, the sentence says that the study “revealed creatures of the seabed…” – and that makes no sense, unless you think that the study involved peeling away layers of sand from the ocean floor to reveal creatures. We also still have the same meaning issue as in (A) and (C): (D) also seems to be saying that the creatures suffered from food supplies. Eliminate (D).


Quote:
E: creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing

(E) is easier to eliminate. Sure, there’s the same meaning issue as in (D) (“revealed creatures of the seabed”), but the modifier beginning with “which” can’t logically modify “dwindling.”

So (E) is gone, and (B) is the winner.
_________________

GMAT Club Verbal Expert | GMAT/GRE tutor @ www.gmatninja.com (Now hiring!) | Instagram | Food blog | Notoriously bad at PMs

Beginners' guides to GMAT verbal
Reading Comprehension | Critical Reasoning | Sentence Correction

YouTube LIVE verbal webinars
Series 1: Fundamentals of SC & CR | Series 2: Developing a Winning GMAT Mindset

SC & CR Questions of the Day (QOTDs), featuring expert explanations
All QOTDs | Subscribe via email | RSS

Need an expert reply?
Hit the request verbal experts' reply button -- and please be specific about your question. Feel free to tag @GMATNinja in your post. Priority is always given to official GMAT questions.

Sentence Correction articles & resources
How to go from great (760) to incredible (780) on GMAT SC | That "-ing" Word Probably Isn't a Verb | That "-ed" Word Might Not Be a Verb, Either | No-BS Guide to GMAT Idioms | "Being" is not the enemy | WTF is "that" doing in my sentence?

Reading Comprehension, Critical Reasoning, and other articles & resources
All GMAT Ninja articles on GMAT Club | Using LSAT for GMAT CR & RC |7 reasons why your actual GMAT scores don't match your practice test scores | How to get 4 additional "fake" GMAT Prep tests for $29.99 | Time management on verbal

Most Helpful Community Reply
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 1047
Location: Bangalore
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Sep 2006, 21:57
7
2
One more for B.

a) that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing - suffering from (a disease).WRONG.

b) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in - suffering because (of a reason)

c) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing - changes the meaning. the creatures were suffering from a lack of food supplies. WRONG

d) creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in - need that. WRONG

e) creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing - need that. WRONG
General Discussion
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Posts: 20
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 30 Jun 2008, 08:48
2
I think the previous posters are correct that the correct answer is B, and that part of the reason that A cannot be correct is that A says the creatures suffered from dwindling food supplies, which doesn't make any sense.

that said, I'll still try to answer your question about "as a result of" vs "resulting from,"

in this sentence, just look at this segment: "... that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from ..."

now remove "of the seabed" and "from dwindling food supplies," to remove some of the clutter of the sentence, because you want to be able to see clearly what the "possibly resulting from" part of the sentence is referring to. that leaves you with "... that creatures ... were suffering ... , possibly resulting from ..."

now you should be able to see pretty clearly that the phenomenon whose cause the sentence is trying to explain is the creatures' suffering, and not the dwindling food supplies. the dwindling food supplies is a secondary point in the sentence. the main issue is the suffering of the creatures. hopefully you can see that when you remove some of the supporting details?

now the question becomes: do creatures suffer as a result of something, or do they suffer resulting from something? only the first choice is correct, because "resulting from" can only be used with a noun, while "as a result of" is used with verbs. since suffer is a verb, "as a result of" must be used.

let me know if you have any questions about that.
SVP
SVP
User avatar
G
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 2277
Location: New York, NY
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Dec 2011, 22:12
1
This is one of those questions that the GMAC folks have focused on - namely you come down to 2 answer choices but the correct answer choice is the one that makes sense within the sentence - though gramatically both can be correct.

In this case, C does not make sense because creatures of the seabed were NOT suffering BECAUSE of food supplies. They were suffering because the food supplies were DWINDLING.

How the sentence is structured comes to this reasoning, though in speech you may have heard people talking this way. But on the GMAT exam, it's not a sentence that makes sense.
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
Joined: 28 Nov 2011
Posts: 301
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 25 Jul 2012, 15:30
4
2
Hi Metallicafan :).

Let me see if I interpret your question correctly. You are asking, I believe, how the participial modifiers work with commas.

1. The sea creatures floated merrily along the water, waving their blubbery flippers.

2. The sea creatures floated merrily along the water waving their blubbery flippers.

In the first case, 'waving their...' refers to the subject of the sentence because of the comma between the participial phrase and the noun water. When I remove the comma, as I did in #2, an illogical comparison arises. Now the water is waving blubbery flippers (which, despite the arresting visual, is clearly nonsensical).

In the original question, in answer choice (A) the participial phrase 'possibly resulting' illogically modifies 'creatures'. You allude to this error. It sounds that the MGMAT folks may have been saying that getting rid of the comma would correct this faulty modification: '...were suffering from dwindling supplies possibly resulting from increasing...'. Nevertheless, this phrase sounds a bit awkward and is not as direct as (B).

Hopefully, that somewhat helps :).
_________________

Christopher Lele
Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image

Retired Moderator
User avatar
Status: 2000 posts! I don't know whether I should feel great or sad about it! LOL
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 1175
Location: Peru
Schools: Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, MIT & HKS (Government)
WE 1: Economic research
WE 2: Banking
WE 3: Government: Foreign Trade and SMEs
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Jul 2012, 07:27
daagh wrote:
I would rather take a less tortuous route to get this solved. An increasing temperature means an on going and continuing affair without a cap and hence is illogical. On the contrary, an increase denotes a certain amount of increase in temperature that has ceased to increase after the spurt. This is acceptable

So we have a cause to dump A, C and E. Coming to B and D, In D, the usage ‘creatures of the seabed that were suffering’ flouts touch rule of the relative pronoun. So there is enough reason to choose B, not withstanding the debate about the modification


Thank you Chriss and daagh!
daagh, I have an additional question: In the case of C, could "as a result of increasing" mean also that the food supplies are increasing the temperature?
Let' see: "...because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing temperatures..."
Now, let's see this example: She love me as a result of sending love letters and chocolates to her.

In this case, "sending" is not a modifier of "love letters and chocolates".

What do you think? Probably, choice C (and A and E) could also have that ambiguous meaning. Maybe we could undestand that the food supplies are increasing the temperatures. In other words, "increasing" is not a modifier in those choices.
_________________

"Life’s battle doesn’t always go to stronger or faster men; but sooner or later the man who wins is the one who thinks he can."

My Integrated Reasoning Logbook / Diary: http://gmatclub.com/forum/my-ir-logbook-diary-133264.html

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Retired Moderator
User avatar
D
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4547
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Jul 2012, 10:25
1
I fully agree that in your example, the word sending is certainly a gerund; However In the case of increasing temps, the expression increasing of temps, would have made it straighter.

If this sentence is flipped it will read as follows: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that increasing temperatures (an increase in temperatures) during the same period possibly caused the dwindling of food supplies, which in turn caused the creatures of the seabed to suffer. Perhaps, this would make it clear what caused what. As per this, it looks as if the temperatures were the initiators of the whole phenomenon.

But IMO, the prime purpose of this topic, would be to test whether 1. We can make a distinction between increasing temperatures and an increase in temperature and whether 2. We can elicit the necessity of using the connector ‘that’ in a reported text such as this.
_________________

you can know a lot about something and not really understand it."-- a quote
No one knows this better than a GMAT student does.
Narendran +9198845 44509

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Posts: 758
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Operations
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.6
GMAT ToolKit User
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Aug 2013, 02:16
2
Dhairya275 wrote:
A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1986 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

A. that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing
B. that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in
C. that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing
D. creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in
E. creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing


IMO B
SOME THEORIES:
-verb-ing =>when followed by a (clause+comma) either modify -whole clause or -show result .
-which =>this can never refer to whole clause it either refers to noun or noun phrase.

A. that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing
WRONG.
-Dwindling food supplies =>it seems that food supplies were dwindling by itself.=>illigical.
-wrong usage of verb-ing after (clause+comma)=>neither showing result of previous clause nor describing previous clause.

B. that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in
RIGHT.

C. that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing
WRONG.
-The part starting from WHICH WERE..{...}is acting as a modifier..now if you remove this modifier you can easily see that sentence is incomplete hence a fragment.

D. creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in
WRONG.
-Lack of THAT after revealed..(revealed that ...)
-again same as C its a fragment.

E. creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing
WRONG.
-use of which is wrong....as we know which cant refer to a CLAUSE hence it is either refering to FOOD SUPPLIES or DWINDLING(not a noun)..in both cases sentence doesnt makes sense.

hence B
_________________

When you want to succeed as bad as you want to breathe ...then you will be successfull....

GIVE VALUE TO OFFICIAL QUESTIONS...



GMAT RCs VOCABULARY LIST: http://gmatclub.com/forum/vocabulary-list-for-gmat-reading-comprehension-155228.html
learn AWA writing techniques while watching video : http://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat-analytical-writing-assessment
: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APt9ITygGss

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4489
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 13 Aug 2013, 10:50
9
4
Dhairya275 wrote:
A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1986 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

A. that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing
B. that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in
C. that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing
D. creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in
E. creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing

I'm happy to help with this. :-)

Split #1: the verb "revealed" requires a "that" clause. See:
http://magoosh.com/gmat/2013/gmat-idiom ... t-clauses/
In colloquial speech, we might drop the word "that", but we cannot do that in the formal language of GMAT SC. Choice (D) & (E) are out.

Split #2: the word "because" is a subordinate clause that must be followed by a full [NOUN] + [VERB] clause. In (C), the word "because" is followed by a noun, "food supplies", but no verb. This commits the missing verb mistake, and is wrong.

Now we are down to (A) & (B). Choice (A) makes a modifier mistake ---- the participle "resulting" should modify the noun it touches, but the "food supplies" were not "resulting from an increasing sea surface temperature". Also, that phrase "an increasing sea surface temperature" is very awkward. It's much clearer to say "an increase in sea surface temperature", which is precisely what (B) has.

Choice (B) is the only answer that is absolutely free of grammatical error. It may not be rhetorically ideal, but it is clearly the best of the five answer choices here.

Does all this make sense?
Mike :-)
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep


Education is not the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire. — William Butler Yeats (1865 – 1939)

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Posts: 447
Concentration: Technology, Other
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2014, 22:49
2
2
Hi,
I am sharing my analysis on mentioned question.Request you to review and confirm, if I am on the right track. I appreciate your support.

1.A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed something.
2.They revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies.
3.The dwindling of food supplies was possibly resulted from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

1. 3:2 split by "that creatures" & "creatures".Does it help in making the right choice.
No.

2. What's the issue with the Q? Modifier issue.
What needs to be modified "the dwindling of food prices".

1."resulting from increasing" in A&D are comma + ing modifier so must modify the clause and make sense with the sub of clause. Here the modifier shall modify "dwindling food supplies".
In option A Sub is "creatures" and in D Sub is "food supplies" so both the options are out.

2.Option C:
creatures .. were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing.
"which" correctly modifies "supplies" but makes it a non essential part whereas it should be essential to complete the meaning of sentence.
I doesn't make sense to say "creatures were suffering because of food supplies" so the other is an essential info.

3.Option E:
dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing. We need to modify "dwindling food prices" not dwindling. Again "which" issue simillar to C. So out.

Correct answer:
B) creatures of the seabed were suffering
because food supplies were dwindling,[Dependent clause]
possibly as a result of an increase in [prepositional modifier modifying the DC]
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
G
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2767
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 04 Aug 2014, 11:01
JarvisR wrote:
Hi,
I am sharing my analysis on mentioned question.Request you to review and confirm, if I am on the right track. I appreciate your support.

1.A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed something.
2.They revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies.
3.The dwindling of food supplies was possibly resulted from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

1. 3:2 split by "that creatures" & "creatures".Does it help in making the right choice.
No.

2. What's the issue with the Q? Modifier issue.
What needs to be modified "the dwindling of food prices".

1."resulting from increasing" in A&D are comma + ing modifier so must modify the clause and make sense with the sub of clause. Here the modifier shall modify "dwindling food supplies".
In option A Sub is "creatures" and in D Sub is "food supplies" so both the options are out.

2.Option C:
creatures .. were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing.
"which" correctly modifies "supplies" but makes it a non essential part whereas it should be essential to complete the meaning of sentence.
I doesn't make sense to say "creatures were suffering because of food supplies" so the other is an essential info.

3.Option E:
dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing. We need to modify "dwindling food prices" not dwindling. Again "which" issue simillar to C. So out.

Correct answer:
B) creatures of the seabed were suffering
because food supplies were dwindling,[Dependent clause]
possibly as a result of an increase in [prepositional modifier modifying the DC]


Hi JarvisR,

That's a very good analysis I must say. Keep up the good work. :-)

However, I would like to add a few points to your analysis.

Well, Choice D and E CAN be rejected because of the absence of "that" before "creatures". Absence of "that" distorts the meaning because per these choice, the study revealed the creatures and not the fact that the creatures were suffering. So we can clearly eliminate Choice D and E for this major distortion in the intended meaning.

You have done an excellent job in describing every answer choice. It's a very thorough analysis. I would just like to add that in Choice E, "which" has been incorrectly used to modify the entire preceding clause "food supplies were dwindling". Note that "were dwindling" is a Verb.

Nonetheless, great job at this one. :-)
SJ
_________________












| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Senior SC Moderator
User avatar
V
Joined: 14 Nov 2016
Posts: 1323
Location: Malaysia
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member CAT Tests
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 May 2017, 18:12
joemama142000 wrote:
A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

(A) that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing

(B) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in

(C) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing

(D) creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in

(E) creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing


(A) "possibly resulting from increasing" is ambiguous. When you end a sentence with a participial phrase (resulting from .....), the participle can actually modify anything in the sentence, even things that are merely implied. So it can lead to ambiguity if it could logically modify more than one thing, such as creatures OR food supplies. But (B) has none of that ambiguity.

(C) has clumsy meaning: "suffering because of food supplies". The creatures weren't suffering from food supplies, but from DWINDLING food supplies.

@GMATNINJA, Could you help to explain the answer choice? I am stuck between (A), (B) and (C).
_________________

"Be challenged at EVERY MOMENT."

“Strength doesn’t come from what you can do. It comes from overcoming the things you once thought you couldn’t.”

"Each stage of the journey is crucial to attaining new heights of knowledge."

Rules for posting in verbal forum | Please DO NOT post short answer in your post!

Advanced Search : https://gmatclub.com/forum/advanced-search/

Retired Moderator
User avatar
S
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 2964
Location: Germany
Schools: German MBA
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 10 May 2017, 06:25
1
2
ziyuen wrote:
joemama142000 wrote:
A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.

(A) that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing

(B) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in

(C) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing

(D) creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in

(E) creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing


(A) "possibly resulting from increasing" is ambiguous. When you end a sentence with a participial phrase (resulting from .....), the participle can actually modify anything in the sentence, even things that are merely implied. So it can lead to ambiguity if it could logically modify more than one thing, such as creatures OR food supplies. But (B) has none of that ambiguity.

(C) has clumsy meaning: "suffering because of food supplies". The creatures weren't suffering from food supplies, but from DWINDLING food supplies.

GMATNinja, Could you help to explain the answer choice? I am stuck between (A), (B) and (C).


A: Wrong. Comma + present participle is technically a verb modifier referring to the main verb of the previous clause. In option A the present participle modifier "possibly resulting from increasing.." should refer to "dwindling". However this modifier wrongly refers to "were suffering". This option wrongly implies that the suffering resulted from increasing temrature, but the intended meaning is that the suffering was due to dwindling food supply, not increasing temparatiure.

C: Wrong. This option wrongly implies that the suffering was due to food supplies. Keeping the word "dwindling" within a subsequent non-essential modifier does not make it clear that the suffering was caused by the "dwindling" itself, not by the "food suppplies".

B: The prepositional phrase modifier ("possibly as a result....") correctly refers to the verb of the previous clause "were dwindling". (Note: Comma + prepositional Phrase modifier can also act as a verb modifier referrong to the verb of the previous clause)
Retired Moderator
User avatar
D
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4547
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 14 Jun 2017, 07:43
Top Contributor
My first comment is about 'from increasing sea surface temps". This meaning is muddled in this expression. Increasing denotes a phenomenon that keeps on going up and ends at the highest at the end of the notified period. Such an infinite activity cannot exist in practice. If we want to say the temps actually increased overall, then the correct expression would be ' increased temps or 'an increase in temps'. Therefore, I will unhesitantly remove A, C and E. D distorts the meaning as though the study revealed the images of pictures of the creatures. B, on the other hand, uses the idiomatic 'that' after the main clause to report the findings of a study and hence is the best answer.
_________________

you can know a lot about something and not really understand it."-- a quote
No one knows this better than a GMAT student does.
Narendran +9198845 44509

Manager
Manager
avatar
B
Joined: 21 Mar 2017
Posts: 54
Re: QOTD: A study of food resources in the North Pacific  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Aug 2017, 07:50
GMATNinja wrote:
Quote:
A: that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly a result from increasing

I don't love the “a result from increasing” at the end of the sentence. “A result of” is the correct idiom. But if you don’t feel certain about that idiom… well, read this article about idioms, maybe. And then look for other stuff.

The more important thing: logically, the first part of the underlined sentence doesn’t make a whole lot of sense. The creatures weren’t suffering from “dwindling food supplies.” Sure, they were suffering because the supplies were dwindling, but they weren’t suffering from the supplies themselves. Food supplies don’t make you suffer. Eliminate (A).

Quote:
B: that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in

Nice, this seems to fix exactly the problems described in (A). Let’s keep (B).

Quote:
C: that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing

Same problem as (A): creatures weren’t suffering because of the food supplies. Food supplies are awesome, and don’t cause suffering. :banana:

Quote:
D: creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in

We actually need the word “that” at the beginning of the underlined portion in this case. Without it, the sentence says that the study “revealed creatures of the seabed…” – and that makes no sense, unless you think that the study involved peeling away layers of sand from the ocean floor to reveal creatures. We also still have the same meaning issue as in (A) and (C): (D) also seems to be saying that the creatures suffered from food supplies. Eliminate (D).


Quote:
E: creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing

(E) is easier to eliminate. Sure, there’s the same meaning issue as in (D) (“revealed creatures of the seabed”), but the modifier beginning with “which” can’t logically modify “dwindling.”

So (E) is gone, and (B) is the winner.


But MGMAT book lists results from as right in its idiom lists.
However, so we can't say "he is suffering from/bcz of low food supply"?
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
G
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2767
Re: QOTD: A study of food resources in the North Pacific  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 03 Aug 2017, 14:05
1
1
rma26 wrote:
However, so we can't say "he is suffering from/bcz of low food supply"?



Hello rma26,

I will be glad to help you out with this one. :-)

The answer to you question is no. We cannot say: He is suffering from low food supply.

It is so because low in your example sentence dwindling in the official sentence are mere modifiers that present some feature of food supply. The main entity in the phrase dwindling/low food supply remains food supply. And as already pointed out, logically food supply cannot be the cause of anyone's suffering.

Hope this helps. :-)
Thanks.
Shraddha
_________________












| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Manager
Manager
User avatar
G
Joined: 21 Mar 2017
Posts: 141
Location: India
GMAT 1: 560 Q48 V20
WE: Other (Computer Software)
GMAT ToolKit User Premium Member Reviews Badge
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 17 Dec 2017, 09:26
Hi?

Please correct my reasoning abt A.

Is it wrong because a verbing should be able to make sense with the subject of the clause i.e Creature of seabed.
And according to it the creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, and this possibly resulting from increasing sea temp.
so it would be wrong as it doesn't make sense.
_________________

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When nothing seem to help, I would go and look at a Stonecutter hammering away at his rock perhaps a hundred time without as much as a crack showing in it.
Yet at the hundred and first blow it would split in two.
And I knew it was not that blow that did it, But all that had gone Before
.

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
S
Joined: 30 Oct 2017
Posts: 194
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 19 Dec 2017, 18:50
1
Prashant10692 wrote:
Hi?

Please correct my reasoning abt A.

Is it wrong because a verbing should be able to make sense with the subject of the clause i.e Creature of seabed.
And according to it the creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, and this possibly resulting from increasing sea temp.
so it would be wrong as it doesn't make sense.


Hi Prashant10692!

I'm happy to jump in for Mike :-) Yes, that's definitely a way that we could think about this! That is correct :-) If we are referring to the entire clause (rather than only the subject of the clause), then we want to use something like "a fact which resulted from", or "as a result of", which choice B correctly uses.

-Carolyn
_________________

Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image

Manager
Manager
User avatar
P
Joined: 24 Oct 2016
Posts: 238
GMAT 1: 670 Q46 V36
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996  [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 26 Nov 2018, 19:45
laxieqv wrote:
A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 revealed that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing sea surface temperatures during the same period.




(A) that creatures of the seabed were suffering from dwindling food supplies, possibly resulting from increasing - Meaning: Food supplies does not cause suffering.

(B) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in

(C) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing - Meaning: Food supplies does not cause suffering.

(D) creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in - Meaning issue. "that" should come before "creatures of the seabed".

(E) creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing - Meaning issue. "that" should come before "creatures of the seabed".
_________________

Most Comprehensive Article on How to Score a 700+ on the GMAT (NEW)
Verb Tenses Simplified

If you found my post useful, KUDOS are much appreciated. Giving Kudos is a great way to thank and motivate contributors, without costing you anything.

GMAT Club Bot
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996 &nbs [#permalink] 26 Nov 2018, 19:45
Display posts from previous: Sort by

A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 and 1996

  new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


Copyright

GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

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®.