It is currently 19 Sep 2017, 21:07

### 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 study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

SVP
Joined: 24 Sep 2005
Posts: 1884

Kudos [?]: 359 [4], given: 0

A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Dec 2005, 20:24
4
KUDOS
9
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

53% (01:01) correct 47% (01:03) wrong based on 3163 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
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA

Kudos [?]: 359 [4], given: 0

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4360

Kudos [?]: 8108 [6], given: 99

Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2013, 11:50
6
KUDOS
Expert's post
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
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

Kudos [?]: 8108 [6], given: 99

VP
Joined: 21 Mar 2006
Posts: 1124

Kudos [?]: 46 [4], given: 0

Location: Bangalore
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Sep 2006, 22:57
4
KUDOS
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
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

Kudos [?]: 46 [4], given: 0

Magoosh GMAT Instructor
Joined: 28 Nov 2011
Posts: 303

Kudos [?]: 1190 [3], given: 2

Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Jul 2012, 16:30
3
KUDOS
Expert's post
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
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

Kudos [?]: 1190 [3], given: 2

Intern
Status: Winning is not everything, but wanting to win is
Joined: 10 Nov 2010
Posts: 34

Kudos [?]: 9 [2], given: 5

WE 1: IT Consultant (6Yr)
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Oct 2012, 07:21
2
KUDOS
Hi

Daagh explained it concisely and precisely,but will take a shot at it breaking down the individual components of that adverbial modifier

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

that creatures of the seabed were suffering --- Dpndt Clause

food supplies were dwindling ---- Dpndt Clause

possibly ---- adverb modifying as a result of

possibly as a result of an increase in ----- adverbial modifier modifying or giving a reason why the food supplies were dwindling

Thanks
Jatin

Kudos [?]: 9 [2], given: 5

Director
Joined: 14 Dec 2012
Posts: 832

Kudos [?]: 1561 [2], given: 197

Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Operations
GMAT 1: 700 Q50 V34
GPA: 3.6
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Aug 2013, 03:16
2
KUDOS
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...

learn AWA writing techniques while watching video : http://www.gmatprepnow.com/module/gmat-analytical-writing-assessment

Kudos [?]: 1561 [2], given: 197

Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 05 Nov 2012
Posts: 536

Kudos [?]: 585 [2], given: 606

Concentration: Technology, Other
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Aug 2014, 23:49
2
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
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.

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]
_________________

--------------------------------------------------------
Regards

Kudos [?]: 585 [2], given: 606

Current Student
Joined: 29 Jan 2005
Posts: 5210

Kudos [?]: 431 [1], given: 0

Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Dec 2005, 06:29
1
KUDOS
(A) for multiple reasons reasons. This sentence is loaded with idioms!

1. dwindling food supplies...increasing sea surface temperatures.... llism.
2. resulting from is idiomatic.
3. revealed that is idiomatic.
4. suffering from is idiomatic.
5. most concise

Kudos [?]: 431 [1], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 31 May 2006
Posts: 368

Kudos [?]: 20 [1], given: 0

Location: Phoenix AZ
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Sep 2006, 14:12
1
KUDOS
jjhko wrote:
hi guru,

Just curious, what made you eliminate A?

jjhko

A has a couple of problems:
1. Idiom: Creatures can suffer from a disease. It is wierd to say "Creatures suffered from a dwindling food resources".
2. the phrase ",possibly resulting from" is not clear what it is trying to modify. In B, there is a clear separation with "because", so we can clearly see that the phrase modififies (supports) the dwindling of the food supplies.

Kudos [?]: 20 [1], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 264

Kudos [?]: 38 [1], given: 0

Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jun 2008, 07:48
1
KUDOS
B for me...

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
You suffer from a disease or something like that...not from dwindling food supplies....boom!!
b) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, possibly as a result of an increase in
Correct
c) that creatures of the seabed were suffering because of food supplies, which were dwindling possibly as a result of increasing
were is ambiguous here....fishes or food supplies dwindling??....hmmm boom!!
d) creatures of the seabed that were suffering from food supplies that were dwindling, possibly resulting from an increase in
The study did not reveal creatures, but the fact that creatures were suffering
e) creatures of the seabed that were suffering because food supplies were dwindling, which possibly resulted from increasing
The study did not reveal creatures, but the fact that creatures were suffering

Kudos [?]: 38 [1], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 27 Jun 2008
Posts: 20

Kudos [?]: 17 [1], given: 0

Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Jun 2008, 09:48
1
KUDOS
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.

Kudos [?]: 17 [1], given: 0

SVP
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 2132

Kudos [?]: 1565 [1], given: 8

Location: New York, NY
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

08 Dec 2011, 23:12
1
KUDOS
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.

Kudos [?]: 1565 [1], given: 8

Retired Moderator
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 4271

Kudos [?]: 7578 [1], given: 360

Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

26 Jul 2012, 11:25
1
KUDOS
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.
_________________

“Better than a thousand days of diligent study is one day with a great teacher” – a Japanese proverb.
9884544509

Kudos [?]: 7578 [1], given: 360

Intern
Joined: 16 Oct 2011
Posts: 2

Kudos [?]: 1 [1], given: 26

Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

27 Jul 2012, 06:17
1
KUDOS
At first glance,I would eliminate A,D,E. Then as far as B and C are concerned...C is unclear about the " Which " ,whether it is referring to the food supplies or the creatures of the sea!! So IMO B as my answer :D

Kudos [?]: 1 [1], given: 26

Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3139

Kudos [?]: 3073 [1], given: 22

Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 May 2017, 07:25
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
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)

Kudos [?]: 3073 [1], given: 22

SVP
Joined: 05 Apr 2005
Posts: 1709

Kudos [?]: 87 [0], given: 0

Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Dec 2005, 07:52
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
laxieqv wrote:
HIMALAYA 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

why not A?

IMO, what "resulting from increasing..." is "dwindling food supplies" ...A makes "resulting...." of the "suffering"

absolutly. the PP "resulting........." doesnot modify the dwindling food supplies. the PP modifies the whole clause not a particular phrase. therefore A is incorrect.

In B it is clear that what is dwindled. so B wins.....

Kudos [?]: 87 [0], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 10 Dec 2005
Posts: 9

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

Location: India
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Dec 2005, 10:07
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
A.says they were suffering from "dwindling food supplies", there is nothing like this
B is correct
C changes the meaning of the sentence by saying "dwindling possibly"
D creatures that were suffering again changes the meaning
E same as D

hence B is correct

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

Director
Joined: 17 Oct 2005
Posts: 924

Kudos [?]: 258 [0], given: 0

Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

11 Dec 2005, 02:39
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

here is my reasoning.

D/E are wrong - need "that"

A is wrong because "suffering from dwindling food supplies " is illogical

a creature can suffer from a broken ankle but how can it suffer from food supplies?

C is wrong because it changes the meaning of the original sentence. Here "dwindling" becomes unessessary modifyer. whereas A it is necessary.

Kudos [?]: 258 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 02 Aug 2006
Posts: 214

Kudos [?]: 323 [0], given: 0

Location: Taipei
Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Sep 2006, 20:04
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

shed light on A&B ...thanks a ton!

Kudos [?]: 323 [0], given: 0

VP
Joined: 21 Aug 2006
Posts: 1013

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989 [#permalink]

### Show Tags

12 Sep 2006, 20:11
jerrywu 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

shed light on A&B ...thanks a ton!

B for the following reasons:

1. "revealed that" seems Idiomatic.

2. I think we use "suffering from" with a noun

3. "possibly resulting from increasing" in A seems awkward
_________________

The path is long, but self-surrender makes it short;
the way is difficult, but perfect trust makes it easy.

Last edited by ak_idc on 13 Sep 2006, 06:04, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 38 [0], given: 0

Re: A study of food resources in the North Pacific between 1989   [#permalink] 12 Sep 2006, 20:11

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 52 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
3 Oblivious to the existence of the Pacific Ocean, Columbus 4 16 Sep 2017, 11:35
9 According to a recent study, Earth's magnetic north pole is moving 20 11 May 2017, 23:54
25 A newly released study on the tectonic plates forming the Pacific 26 03 Sep 2017, 07:00
6 A study of food resources in the North Pacific - GMATPrep - Option Dif 4 14 Jun 2017, 02:54
7 QOTD: A study of food resources in the North Pacific 5 03 Aug 2017, 15:05
Display posts from previous: Sort by