Because of vermin’s ability to adapt to pesticides, pesticides become

This is assumption question, specifically, defender assumption (Power Score CR bible)
Premise: Vermin can adapt pesticide.
Premise: new pesticide prevents Vermin to adapt pesticide.
Conclusion: New pesticide helps most farmers to solve the Vermin problem.

Assumption: Farmers must have ability to buy New pesticide. If Not, they cannot solve the Vermin problem.

Straight E.

If you are stuck between C and E, C is incorrect as it questions the FACT/PREMISE. Secondly this is already used in the field.
Secondly, using negation technique, C doesnt fill the gap between the premise and the conclusion whereas E demolishes it.

The trick is that first the argument discusses adaptability and then goes to farmers

Conclusion: The vermin problem for most farmers has been solved once and for all

Assumption (defender): No limitation for the new pesticide to solve problems of farmers exists

C says that No experience shows that adaptability issue is not solved when declared (no words about farmers)

E says that price for new pesticide will be good for farmers to afford it (fits conclusion)

E

I agree with the above comments:

The conclusion: the V problem of farmers is solved!

the author assumes that:
1. the farmers will afford the new pesticide

2. the new pesticide will actually be effective in real-time conditions

(A)The new pesticide is cheaper than any pesticide previously developed.
Even if it's cheaper than any pesticide previously developed, it can still be priced such that the farmers cannot afford it.

(B)No other chemical company will develop a similar pesticide.
irrelevant to the conclusion, although the more companies do develop, the more competition on the market, and thus the lower the prices would be.

(C) No chemical company previously made erroneous claims about having developed pesticides that preclude the possibility of vermin adapting to them.
even if companies made erroneous claims, the new one proved to be a successful one.

(D)Vermin are the most serious threat to crops.
well, yes, it is specified in the argument.

(E)The new pesticide will be priced so that most farmers can afford it.
if this choice is negated, the conclusion is shattered and no longer stands.

E thus is the best answer.

[quote="guerrero25"]Because of vermin’s ability to adapt to pesticides, pesticides become ineffective after several years, and chemical companies have to develop new pesticides regularly. A new pesticide that proved highly effective against most species of vermin was developed recently with a unique chemical composition to which vermin will not be able to adapt. Clearly, the vermin problem for most farmers has been solved once and for all.

The argument above depends on which of the following assumptions?
(A)The new pesticide is cheaper than any pesticide previously developed.
(B)No other chemical company will develop a similar pesticide.
(C) No chemical company previously made erroneous claims about having developed pesticides that preclude the possibility of vermin adapting to them.
(D)Vermin are the most serious threat to crops.
(E)The new pesticide will be priced so that most farmers can afford it.


Premise 1: Because of vermin’s ability to adapt to pesticides, pesticides become ineffective after several years, and chemical companies have to develop new pesticides regularly.
Premise 2: A new pesticide that proved highly effective against most species of vermin was developed recently with a unique chemical composition to which vermin will not be able to adapt.
Conclusion the vermin problem for [color=#005e20]most farmers has been solved once and for all. [/color]
from this it is clear that from Premise 2 authore is establishing his conclusion.

New pesticide highly effective and pest will not be able to adapt ----------> Most farmers' problems have been solved

Just think: How author has deduce the above said argument
Assumption 1: few of the remaining species of pesticide will not atack mot of the farmers crops.
Assumption 2: Farmers can afford this new pesticide.

Now POE.
(A)IncorrectThe new pesticide is cheaper than any pesticide previously developed. The argument never talks about price. This is the strengthner answer chice but definitely not an assumption. Just negate the above statement. Even after negating we can see that the negated A does not shatter the conclusion
(B)IncorrectNo other chemical company will develop a similar pesticide. Whether new compan will develop similar pesticide. It will not help conclusion in any way.
(C) IncorrectNo chemical company previously made erroneous claims about having developed pesticides that preclude the possibility of vermin adapting to them. Lets' assume few company has made erroneous claims about having developed pesticide..... So What? not helped us in any way
(D)IncorrectVermin are the most serious threat to crops. We are not interested in seriousness abut pests.
(E)CorrectThe new pesticide will be priced so that most farmers can afford it.
Bingo! It matches with our assumption.
Negate E to check whether Negated E shatters the conclusion
E') The new pesticide will be priced so high that most farmers cannot afford it.
E' shatters our conclusion
Hence E is our answer.

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.