Relations given:

Fuzzy seeds ---> long stem
Fuzzy seeds -/-> white flowers
Curled leaves ---> white flowers
Thorny seedpods ---> Curled leaves ---> white flowers (from above)

Note that these all are single direction relations. So long stem does not imply fuzzy seeds. Only fuzzy seeds imply long stem is present.

Specimen has long stem and curled leaves. Long stem doesn't imply anything because it is not at the left side in any relation.
Curled leaves implies white flowers. So the specimen has white flowers.
But note this relation: Fuzzy seeds -/-> white flowers

Fuzzy seeds implies that white flowers cannot be there. If white flowers are there, it means there must be no fuzzy seeds. Had there been fuzzy seeds, white flowers would not have been there.

So we get that the specimen has white flowers but lacks fuzzy seeds.

Answer (C)
_________________

This is one of the only question types in CR that makes me write down information.

Once you have the information structured, it turns out the specimen of plant X will have white flowers but no fuzzy seeds as these attributes do not go together.

Regards,
Chris
_________________

VeritasKarishma & daagh

Thoughts on this?

Awesome question. Did this w/o pen and paper but took a bit time to structure it.
Logic is to check what no fuzzy seeds plants' characteristic will be?

Posted from my mobile device

Can somebody help me if it lacks fuzzy seeds then how X has long stems?
In my opinion D is right

Posted from my mobile device

According to the given information - FS -> LS ...(1),
FS-> WF...(2),
CL -> WF...(3),
TS-> CL...(4)
This implies - WF -> FS ...(5) (from (2) ))
and CL -> FS ..(6) (from 3 and 5)

From 6 and 3 , we get choice C

I highly doubt that this type of question will come up in GMAT. This is a very LSATy thing.

Hey Mohitstarc

The given condition says that, if the plant has fuzzy seeds, it will always have long stems.
Fuzzy seeds -> Long stems.
This doesn't mean all plants with long stems will have Fuzzy seeds. I.e, the vice versa NEED NOT be true.

Consider a similar example below.
If I have tea, I'll always have biscuits along with tea.
Tea -> Biscuits.
We can infer from the above statement that if I had tea, I definitely had biscuits along with tea. We CANNOT infer that if I had biscuits, I had tea.

Hope it's clear!

Cheers!