It is currently 22 Sep 2017, 10:31

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

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow

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

Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Posts: 338

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 26

Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Jun 2016, 18:40
EMPOWERgmatMax wrote:
In Colorado subalpine meadows, nonnative dandelions co-occur with a native flower, the larkspur. Bumblebees visit both species, creating the potential for interactions between the two species with respect to pollination. In a recent study, researchers selected 16 plots containing both species; all dandelions were removed from eight plots; the remaining eight control plots were left undisturbed. The control plots yielded significantly more larkspur seeds than the dandelion-free plots, leading the researchers to conclude that the presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the researchers' reasoning?

(B) In mixed plots, pollinators can transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.

(E) Soil disturbances can result in fewer blooms, and hence lower seed production.



Type: Weaken
Boil It Down: Dandelions removed, larkspur down -> Dandelions boost pollination of native
Missing Information: Were there other factors?
Goal: Find the option that shows that the difference in pollination between the two groups in the study is not about the presence of dandelions.

B) This option would also appear to strengthen the argument that the presence of dandelions boosts pollination of native plants since this option would suggest that pollination is enhanced in mixed plots (those that include dandelions).

E) Yes! Here we have an option that directly offers an alternative explanation. The difference in pollination in the study wasn't the presence of dandelions (or the lack of them) but rather the fact that the removal of the dandelions in the study disrupted blooms, and thus pollination. This option exposes the dark truth that this study is miserably flawed.

HiLine wrote:
But answer B implies that the result is not achieved by attracting pollinators, so it weakens the argument, doesn't it?
Hi HiLine,

The reasoning behind your question is not entirely clear. Please elaborate.

This is how I read the whole thing:

The conclusion says that the presence of dandelions facilitates seed production by attracting pollinators. Answer B implies that dandelions facilitate seed production by allowing pollinators to transfer pollen from one species to another, thus weakening the argument.

Let me know if you need further elaboration.

Hi HiLine,

To confirm your reasoning: you're saying that B provides a counter-theory in that B refers to instances of the SAME pollinators transferring pollen to different plant species to boost pollination, therefore it appears to run counter to the claim that mixed plots increases the NUMBER of pollinators.

Two Critical And Larger GMAT Perspective Issues
I'm glad you asked because your question will enable us to look at some bigger perspective items that will help boost your accuracy.

1) Correct GMAT Weakener Options NEVER, EVER directly contradict the facts. That's actually one of the reasons why we urge such caution when GMAT students feel inclined to use non-official material to try to save money---we've seen inferior question sources outright contradict the prompt. That will never happen on the real thing. So, that said, your read on B requires the interpretation that it contradicts the stated fact that the number of pollinators increased. That interpretation must be ruled out immediately.

2) "CAN" - The GMAT test-writers love to measure the unfounded assumptions test-takers make. How often is "can"? It could be 1 in 1,000,000, and thus statistically irrelevant. For B to be of perceived value, you'd have to make the assumption that "can" implies a relevant frequency. We can't make that kind of assumption here or in any CR question.


My read on B does not require the interpretation that it contradicts a stated fact. Where is it established in the text that the number of pollinators actually increased? From what I see, that the number of pollinators increased is a hypothesis.

Answer choice E, like answer choice B, uses the word "can".

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 26

EMPOWERgmat Discount CodesEconomist GMAT Tutor Discount CodesOptimus Prep Discount Codes
Expert Post
EMPOWERgmat Instructor
User avatar
Joined: 23 Feb 2015
Posts: 176

Kudos [?]: 570 [0], given: 51

Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 08 Jun 2016, 20:24
Hi HiLine,

Glad you're all set with point 2, but for point 1, we need to take a deeper look since this raises an important distinction that tends to be widely misunderstood, or not understood at all. For that, I'm thankful your follow up prompted us to explore this distinction a little further. There are two things that no correct option in an Official GMAT Weaken question has ever done:

1) Directly contradict the conclusion stated - For example, simplifying the conclusion of this very prompt: pollination is increased by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots. GMAT options would never effectively say: More pollinators were not attracted to the mixed plots. Your interpretation of option B is essentially tantamount to a direct rebuttal of the conclusion (hypothesis). No correct option to an Official GMAT Weakener has ever directly attacked the conclusion (hypothesis). The right option will always attack the underlying, presumed information.

2) Directly contradict the evidence stated - For example, one of the points of evidence is that: all dandelions were removed from eight plots. You wouldn't see a correct Official GMAT Weakener say something to the effect of: It's not true that all dandelions were removed from the eight plots.

Both of these routes involve surface level attack. If you'd like to solidify your sense of the standard that these two avenues are not used by GMAC, you can take a look at the publicly available Official GMAT questions in the main OG, as well as the supplements, and you'll notice that not a single correct option ever directly attacks the evidence or conclusion (hypothesis).

GMAC engineers the questions to measure the test-taker's ability to dismantle the engine of the argument (the missing information taken for granted by the author) since that is a high-level skill important to business school and beyond.

Here, option E undercuts the presumption that there were no other factors that could have accounted for the increased seed production, and that's why E is our winner.

Thanks for eliciting this further discussion. I think this distinction is really important for other readers of this thread to see. I've Kudo'd your initial question.
_________________

"Students study. GMAT assassins train."
Image

★★★★★ GMAT Club Verified Reviews for EMPOWERgmat & Special Discount

GMAT Club Verbal Advantage EMPOWERgmat Critical Reasoning Question Pack

Kudos [?]: 570 [0], given: 51

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Posts: 338

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 26

Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Jun 2016, 00:12
Max,

Thanks for your response and kudos. I get what you're saying, but what really is the distinction between answer choices B and E? Both options provide alternative explanations for seed production being higher in the mixed plots. Answer choice B does not say that not more pollinators were attracted; rather, it says that not necessarily more pollinators were attracted, just as answer choice E does. And both answer choices use the word "can". :roll:

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 26

Expert Post
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
G
Joined: 28 Dec 2011
Posts: 4366

Kudos [?]: 8143 [0], given: 100

Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 09 Jun 2016, 11:29
HiLine wrote:
Mike, that makes sense. But the increased seed production could be caused merely by the cross-species pollen transfer, which provides no ground for the conclusion that seed production is argumented by dandelions attracting more pollinators (sorry I forgot to include the key word "more" in the previous post! )

Ha great to run into someone that appreciates my avatar! You must be smart for liking Beethoven's music. 8-)

Dear HiLine,
I'm happy to respond. :-)

The prompt argument ends as follows:
... leading the researchers to conclude that the presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.
Fundamentally, they are getting more seed because of the pollinators. This discusses attracting the pollinators to the plot.

Here's (B).
(B) In mixed plots, pollinators can transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.
Again, they are getting more seed because of the pollinators. This discusses the role of the pollinators in cross-pollination.

We could draw a hypertechnical distinction between these two, but both of them concern the pollinators are the principle agent of the increase seed production. The fundamental story, pollinators are responsible for greater seed production, is the same in both, although they emphasize different and complementary angles of it. If some researchers published the prompt argument, and then another researcher came along and published (B), then this second paper would be seen as generally supporting the original point, even though the emphasis is slightly different. It is eminently possible to imagine both of these being true at the same time and supporting each other, both part of a larger coherent narrative.

You see, to be a weakener, we can't say something that we have a hard time distinguishing from the original argument, or that requires really fine grade distinctions. A weakener has to provide a strong contrast: it's not due to X, but due to Y, which is totally different.

This is why (E) is such a successful and strong weakener. It draws a sharp distinction. The enhanced seed growth had absolutely nothing to do with the pollinators at all: it had to do with soil disturbance, which is entirely different from the action of pollinators. The original researchers, in looking at the pollinators, were looking in the wrong place!

This is an extremely subtle issue with GMAT CR. CR is not math. In mathematics, the tiniest little difference, e.g. 1.01345 vs. 1.01346, is just as meaningful as the biggest difference. That's not true in CR. In GMAT CR, we need to be discerning and thoughtful, but not picayune and legalistic. On the one hand, we can't afford to be so sloppy that we overlook meaningful differences. On the other hand, we can't allow ourselves to become paralyzed in over-analyzing the minutiae. It's a very subtle balance that involves both cognitive skills and emotional intelligence. This same sort of balance is essential in all the deals & decisions that a manager has to make in the real business world. A familiarity with the nature of the distinctions in real-world business deals would help immensely with skill on GMAT SC. See:
GMAT Critical Reasoning and Outside Knowledge

As I have typed this response, I have been listening to Claudio Arrau play the Piano Sonata in E-flat, Op. 31, #3. I think Beethoven was one the greatest geniuses who has ever lived.

Mike :-)
_________________

Mike McGarry
Magoosh Test Prep

Image

Image

Kudos [?]: 8143 [0], given: 100

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Posts: 338

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 26

Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 11 Jun 2016, 22:14
mikemcgarry wrote:
HiLine wrote:
Mike, that makes sense. But the increased seed production could be caused merely by the cross-species pollen transfer, which provides no ground for the conclusion that seed production is argumented by dandelions attracting more pollinators (sorry I forgot to include the key word "more" in the previous post! )

Ha great to run into someone that appreciates my avatar! You must be smart for liking Beethoven's music. 8-)

Dear HiLine,
I'm happy to respond. :-)

The prompt argument ends as follows:
... leading the researchers to conclude that the presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.
Fundamentally, they are getting more seed because of the pollinators. This discusses attracting the pollinators to the plot.

Here's (B).
(B) In mixed plots, pollinators can transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.
Again, they are getting more seed because of the pollinators. This discusses the role of the pollinators in cross-pollination.

We could draw a hypertechnical distinction between these two, but both of them concern the pollinators are the principle agent of the increase seed production. The fundamental story, pollinators are responsible for greater seed production, is the same in both, although they emphasize different and complementary angles of it. If some researchers published the prompt argument, and then another researcher came along and published (B), then this second paper would be seen as generally supporting the original point, even though the emphasis is slightly different. It is eminently possible to imagine both of these being true at the same time and supporting each other, both part of a larger coherent narrative.

You see, to be a weakener, we can't say something that we have a hard time distinguishing from the original argument, or that requires really fine grade distinctions. A weakener has to provide a strong contrast: it's not due to X, but due to Y, which is totally different.

This is why (E) is such a successful and strong weakener. It draws a sharp distinction. The enhanced seed growth had absolutely nothing to do with the pollinators at all: it had to do with soil disturbance, which is entirely different from the action of pollinators. The original researchers, in looking at the pollinators, were looking in the wrong place!

This is an extremely subtle issue with GMAT CR. CR is not math. In mathematics, the tiniest little difference, e.g. 1.01345 vs. 1.01346, is just as meaningful as the biggest difference. That's not true in CR. In GMAT CR, we need to be discerning and thoughtful, but not picayune and legalistic. On the one hand, we can't afford to be so sloppy that we overlook meaningful differences. On the other hand, we can't allow ourselves to become paralyzed in over-analyzing the minutiae. It's a very subtle balance that involves both cognitive skills and emotional intelligence. This same sort of balance is essential in all the deals & decisions that a manager has to make in the real business world. A familiarity with the nature of the distinctions in real-world business deals would help immensely with skill on GMAT SC. See:
GMAT Critical Reasoning and Outside Knowledge

As I have typed this response, I have been listening to Claudio Arrau play the Piano Sonata in E-flat, Op. 31, #3. I think Beethoven was one the greatest geniuses who has ever lived.

Mike :-)


I always thought there was only one correct answer choice for each GMAT question, until I ran into this one. Thanks for your detailed answer which makes perfect sense to me and demonstrates a different level of understanding of the way GMAC designs their questions and answers. While I believe this type of questions is rare, I set out a goal for myself to be able to comfortably answer any official GMAT question encountered, and therefore your answer to my questions is tremendously helpful.

I am impressed. You're really good at GMAT CR. You must listen to a lot more Beethoven music than I do. :-D

Case in point: A big fan of Beethoven as I am, I had not listened to this one sonata in full until you pointed it out to me! I had listened to only the second movement. :)

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 26

Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 04 Jun 2016
Posts: 648

Kudos [?]: 346 [0], given: 36

GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V43
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 16 Jul 2016, 06:24
1
This post was
BOOKMARKED
WillGetIt wrote:
In Colorado subalpine meadows, nonnative dandelions co-occur with a native flower, the larkspur. Bumblebees visit both species, creating the potential for interactions between the two species with respect to pollination. In a recent study, researchers selected 16 plots containing both species; all dandelions were removed fiom eight plots; the remaining eight control plots were left undisturbed. The control plots yielded significantly more larkspur seeds than the dandelion-free plots, leading the researchers to conclude that the presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the researchers’ reasoning?

A. Bumblebees preferentially visit dandelions over larkspurs in mixed plots.

B. In mixed plots, pollinators can transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.

C. If left unchecked, nonnative species like dandelions quickly crowd out native species.

D. Seed germination is a more reliable measure of a species’ fitness than seed production.

E. Soil disturbances can result in fewer blooms, and hence lower seed production.

"Please hit +kudos if you like this post"



What a dense passage and what an easy answer. :) Passage took 3 minute for reading, mapping, assimilation and comprehending. Answer was revealed in 10 seconds.
E is the answer.
When researcher removed all dandelion, they must have disturbed the soil.
Option E tells us when soil is disturbed, then flowers are not produced and thus lower seeds are produced. (by the way yes, flowers turn into fruits in all species. and fruits contains seeds ; whether they look like flowers or not , technically all flowers changes to fruits... anyway ...) SO disturbed soil have caused LESS SEEDS clearly weakens the conclusion that lack of dandelion causes less seeds and more dandelion causes more seeds.
_________________

Posting an answer without an explanation is "GOD COMPLEX". The world doesn't need any more gods. Please explain you answers properly.
FINAL GOODBYE :- 17th SEPTEMBER 2016. .. 16 March 2017 - I am back but for all purposes please consider me semi-retired.

Kudos [?]: 346 [0], given: 36

Expert Post
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 230

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 32

GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 31 Jul 2016, 11:20
Hi HiLine,

What happens if you negate choice B?

(B) In mixed plots, pollinators can transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.
Pollinators can't transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production. Add this to the argument and the conclusion doesn't make much sense. That means that choice B is a strengthen. Hope that helps in crossing this choice out.

Happy Studies,

A.
_________________

"It is a curious property of research activity that after the problem has been solved the solution seems obvious. This is true not only for those who have not previously been acquainted with the problem, but also for those who have worked over it for years." -Dr. Edwin Land

GMAT vs GRE Comparison

If you found my post useful KUDOS are much appreciated.

IMPROVE YOUR READING COMPREHENSION with the ECONOMIST READING COMPREHENSION CHALLENGE:

Here is the first set along with some strategies for approaching this work: http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-economist-reading-comprehension-challenge-151479.html

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 32

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Posts: 338

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 26

Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2016, 07:06
HerrGrau wrote:
Hi HiLine,

What happens if you negate choice B?

(B) In mixed plots, pollinators can transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.
Pollinators can't transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production. Add this to the argument and the conclusion doesn't make much sense. That means that choice B is a strengthen. Hope that helps in crossing this choice out.

Happy Studies,

A.


If you negate choice B, the conclusion gets strengthened as I explained above. Negating choice B means eliminating one of the possible explanations for the mixed plot to yield more seeds, and thus strengthens the theory that the higher yield is due to dandelions attracting more pollinators.

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 26

Expert Post
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 230

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 32

GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2016, 07:58
Conclusion: The presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

(B) In mixed plots, pollinators can transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.

This choice agrees with the conclusion by supporting the assumption that it is the pollinators that are increasing seed production.

Negation: Pollinators can't transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.

The negation weakens the argument by attacking the mechanism that the conclusion relies on (the pollinators).

Read the negation and then the conclusion:

Because pollinators CAN'T transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production the presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

Do these two sentences seem to be working together? I don't think they do. The first seems to contradict the second.

It would sound way better like this:

Because pollinators can transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production the presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

Hope that is helpful.

Happy Studies,

A.
_________________

"It is a curious property of research activity that after the problem has been solved the solution seems obvious. This is true not only for those who have not previously been acquainted with the problem, but also for those who have worked over it for years." -Dr. Edwin Land

GMAT vs GRE Comparison

If you found my post useful KUDOS are much appreciated.

IMPROVE YOUR READING COMPREHENSION with the ECONOMIST READING COMPREHENSION CHALLENGE:

Here is the first set along with some strategies for approaching this work: http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-economist-reading-comprehension-challenge-151479.html

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 32

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Posts: 338

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 26

Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2016, 08:10
HerrGrau wrote:
Conclusion: The presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

(B) In mixed plots, pollinators can transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.

This choice agrees with the conclusion by supporting the assumption that it is the pollinators that are increasing seed production.



This is not an assumption. The point is that the additional pollinators are increasing seed production. The "usual" pollinators are not necessarily increasing seed production. Even if pollinators cannot transfer pollen from one species to another, simply by increasing their numbers, pollinators can augment seed production. Unless, of course, my understanding of pollination is off-base. Wait, is it? :|

HerrGrau wrote:
Negation: Pollinators can't transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production.

The negation weakens the argument by attacking the mechanism that the conclusion relies on (the pollinators).



The mechanism is not the pollinators. The mechanism is "attracting more pollinators".

So if the pollinators in the mixed plots already give mixed plots the advantage, the mixed plots do not have to attract more pollinators, and thus the conclusion that the mechanism is attracting more pollinators is not supported.

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 26

Expert Post
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 230

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 32

GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2016, 08:18
I broke down why B is a strengthen not only by showing how it strengthened but by showing how the negation weakened. I didn't add a whole bunch of story to support my analysis (what you are doing and what you should be very careful of doing on CR/RC). I took words from the argument and strung them together. Is there anything in that analysis that you're finding fault with?
_________________

"It is a curious property of research activity that after the problem has been solved the solution seems obvious. This is true not only for those who have not previously been acquainted with the problem, but also for those who have worked over it for years." -Dr. Edwin Land

GMAT vs GRE Comparison

If you found my post useful KUDOS are much appreciated.

IMPROVE YOUR READING COMPREHENSION with the ECONOMIST READING COMPREHENSION CHALLENGE:

Here is the first set along with some strategies for approaching this work: http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-economist-reading-comprehension-challenge-151479.html

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 32

Expert Post
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 230

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 32

GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2016, 08:19
HerrGrau wrote:
Because pollinators CAN'T transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production the presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

Do these two sentences seem to be working together? I don't think they do. The first seems to contradict the second.


Coming back here again. Any questions on how the first part weakens the second or at least doesn't strengthen the second?
_________________

"It is a curious property of research activity that after the problem has been solved the solution seems obvious. This is true not only for those who have not previously been acquainted with the problem, but also for those who have worked over it for years." -Dr. Edwin Land

GMAT vs GRE Comparison

If you found my post useful KUDOS are much appreciated.

IMPROVE YOUR READING COMPREHENSION with the ECONOMIST READING COMPREHENSION CHALLENGE:

Here is the first set along with some strategies for approaching this work: http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-economist-reading-comprehension-challenge-151479.html

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 32

Expert Post
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 230

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 32

GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2016, 08:25
HiLine wrote:
Even if pollinators cannot transfer pollen from one species to another, simply by increasing their numbers, pollinators can augment seed production.


This is an assumption that you are making.
_________________

"It is a curious property of research activity that after the problem has been solved the solution seems obvious. This is true not only for those who have not previously been acquainted with the problem, but also for those who have worked over it for years." -Dr. Edwin Land

GMAT vs GRE Comparison

If you found my post useful KUDOS are much appreciated.

IMPROVE YOUR READING COMPREHENSION with the ECONOMIST READING COMPREHENSION CHALLENGE:

Here is the first set along with some strategies for approaching this work: http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-economist-reading-comprehension-challenge-151479.html

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 32

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Posts: 338

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 26

Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2016, 08:34
HerrGrau wrote:
HerrGrau wrote:
Because pollinators CAN'T transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production the presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

Do these two sentences seem to be working together? I don't think they do. The first seems to contradict the second.


Coming back here again. Any questions on how the first part weakens the second or at least doesn't strengthen the second?


Why does the first contradict the second?

If pollinators cannot transfer pollen from one species to another in mixed plots to augment seed production relative to dandelion-free plots, while seed production is better in mixed plots, the increase in seed production is likely caused by the presence of more pollinators in the mixed plots.

First theory: pollinators in mixed plots do "better"
Second theory: pollinators in mixed plots are more numerous

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 26

Expert Post
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 230

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 32

GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2016, 08:42
HiLine wrote:
HerrGrau wrote:
HerrGrau wrote:
Because pollinators CAN'T transfer pollen from one species to another to augment seed production the presence of dandelions facilitates pollination (and hence seed production) in the native species by attracting more pollinators to the mixed plots.

Do these two sentences seem to be working together? I don't think they do. The first seems to contradict the second.


Coming back here again. Any questions on how the first part weakens the second or at least doesn't strengthen the second?


HiLine wrote:
Why does the first contradict the second?


If the pollinators can't transfer pollen how could they possibly facilitate pollination (within the scope of the argument)? We can agree to disagree here. We're getting to the point of me saying the color is blue and you saying it's green:) That's fine. We can agree to disagree.

A.
_________________

"It is a curious property of research activity that after the problem has been solved the solution seems obvious. This is true not only for those who have not previously been acquainted with the problem, but also for those who have worked over it for years." -Dr. Edwin Land

GMAT vs GRE Comparison

If you found my post useful KUDOS are much appreciated.

IMPROVE YOUR READING COMPREHENSION with the ECONOMIST READING COMPREHENSION CHALLENGE:

Here is the first set along with some strategies for approaching this work: http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-economist-reading-comprehension-challenge-151479.html

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 32

Expert Post
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 230

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 32

GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2016, 08:46
HiLine wrote:
If pollinators cannot transfer pollen from one species to another in mixed plots to augment seed production relative to dandelion-free plots, while seed production is better in mixed plots, the increase in seed production is likely caused by the presence of more pollinators in the mixed plots.


OK - so I understand that you're saying that it's not the greater number of pollinators but something different about the pollinators in the mixed plots. Is that right? In the abstract that's OK. Reasoning is good. But, choice B doesn't provide that "other factor". An example of that "other factor" would be:

1. The mixed plots got more sun which stimulated more pollen.
2. The roots of the two plants interacting somehow stimulates pollen.
3. The dandelions release another chemical that stimulates pollen in the other plant.

A.
_________________

"It is a curious property of research activity that after the problem has been solved the solution seems obvious. This is true not only for those who have not previously been acquainted with the problem, but also for those who have worked over it for years." -Dr. Edwin Land

GMAT vs GRE Comparison

If you found my post useful KUDOS are much appreciated.

IMPROVE YOUR READING COMPREHENSION with the ECONOMIST READING COMPREHENSION CHALLENGE:

Here is the first set along with some strategies for approaching this work: http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-economist-reading-comprehension-challenge-151479.html


Last edited by HerrGrau on 01 Aug 2016, 08:55, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 32

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Posts: 338

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 26

Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2016, 08:52
HerrGrau wrote:

If the pollinators can't transfer pollen how could they possibly facilitate pollination (within the scope of the argument)? We can agree to disagree here. We're getting to the point of me saying the color is blue and you saying it's green:) That's fine. We can agree to disagree.

A.


I think we're actually coming closer to agreement. Please do try your best to disprove my explanation; I'd prefer all GMAT questions had only one correct answer each. Not a fan of exceptions. :)

You mean if the pollinators cannot transfer pollen from one species to another? Pollinators can transfer pollen among individuals within a species. I read the answer choice as pollinators that can transfer pollen between species are better at facilitating pollination than pollinators that cannot. Did I read it wrong?

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 26

Expert Post
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 230

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 32

GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2016, 09:00
HiLine wrote:
HerrGrau wrote:

If the pollinators can't transfer pollen how could they possibly facilitate pollination (within the scope of the argument)? We can agree to disagree here. We're getting to the point of me saying the color is blue and you saying it's green:) That's fine. We can agree to disagree.

A.


I think we're actually coming closer to agreement. Please do try your best to disprove my explanation; I'd prefer all GMAT questions had only one correct answer each. Not a fan of exceptions. :)

You mean if the pollinators cannot transfer pollen from one species to another? Pollinators can transfer pollen among individuals within a species. I read the answer choice as pollinators that can transfer pollen between species are better at facilitating pollination than pollinators that cannot. Did I read it wrong?


Sounds good. Yes - I think that's the issue. We're told that more pollination means more seed production. So it makes sense that if one species can pollinate the other that the pollination would "augment" seed production. That doesn't mean that the inter-plant pollination is better than the intra-plant pollination.

A.
_________________

"It is a curious property of research activity that after the problem has been solved the solution seems obvious. This is true not only for those who have not previously been acquainted with the problem, but also for those who have worked over it for years." -Dr. Edwin Land

GMAT vs GRE Comparison

If you found my post useful KUDOS are much appreciated.

IMPROVE YOUR READING COMPREHENSION with the ECONOMIST READING COMPREHENSION CHALLENGE:

Here is the first set along with some strategies for approaching this work: http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-economist-reading-comprehension-challenge-151479.html

Kudos [?]: 245 [0], given: 32

Senior Manager
Senior Manager
User avatar
B
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Posts: 338

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 26

Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 770 Q51 V44
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Consulting)
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2016, 09:04
HerrGrau wrote:
HiLine wrote:
HerrGrau wrote:

If the pollinators can't transfer pollen how could they possibly facilitate pollination (within the scope of the argument)? We can agree to disagree here. We're getting to the point of me saying the color is blue and you saying it's green:) That's fine. We can agree to disagree.

A.


I think we're actually coming closer to agreement. Please do try your best to disprove my explanation; I'd prefer all GMAT questions had only one correct answer each. Not a fan of exceptions. :)

You mean if the pollinators cannot transfer pollen from one species to another? Pollinators can transfer pollen among individuals within a species. I read the answer choice as pollinators that can transfer pollen between species are better at facilitating pollination than pollinators that cannot. Did I read it wrong?


Sounds good. Yes - I think that's the issue. We're told that more pollination means more seed production. So it makes sense that if one species can pollinate the other that the pollination would "augment" seed production. That doesn't mean that the inter-plant pollination is better than the intra-plant pollination.

A.


Better in what way? If inter-plant pollination augments seed production, I take that to mean inter-plant pollination results in better seed production than intra-plant pollination.

So doesn't that make answer choice B a valid alternative explanation for the mixed plots to have better seed production?

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 26

Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Jan 2013
Posts: 230

Kudos [?]: 245 [1], given: 32

GMAT 1: 780 Q49 V51
Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow [#permalink]

Show Tags

New post 01 Aug 2016, 09:10
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
Yep it does. I can see why that's confusing. But it doesn't have to be compared to the other plot (the non-mixed one). Adding more pollen increases seed production. That's it. No comparison to anything else except the previous state of having less pollen. Why does it have to be that adding more pollen in the mixed plot is different than in the non-mixed plot?

A.
_________________

"It is a curious property of research activity that after the problem has been solved the solution seems obvious. This is true not only for those who have not previously been acquainted with the problem, but also for those who have worked over it for years." -Dr. Edwin Land

GMAT vs GRE Comparison

If you found my post useful KUDOS are much appreciated.

IMPROVE YOUR READING COMPREHENSION with the ECONOMIST READING COMPREHENSION CHALLENGE:

Here is the first set along with some strategies for approaching this work: http://gmatclub.com/forum/the-economist-reading-comprehension-challenge-151479.html

Kudos [?]: 245 [1], given: 32

Re: CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow   [#permalink] 01 Aug 2016, 09:10

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3    Next  [ 54 posts ] 

    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
3 OG 13th edition Review for CR questions. - question type. Nightmare007 0 13 Apr 2017, 19:15
30 Compilation of CR Questions from old OGs Agmatter 5 15 Feb 2017, 02:35
29 Classification by question Type - CR OG 13 aim730 3 29 Mar 2016, 12:07
37 New CR Question from OG 2016 (Garlic Fields) WillGetIt 12 26 Jul 2017, 11:26
85 EXPERTS_POSTS_IN_THIS_TOPIC CR challenge Question: Beach City Airport OG 2016 WillGetIt 34 07 Sep 2017, 12:08
Display posts from previous: Sort by

CR Challenge Question: Bumblebees OG 2016 In Colorado subalpine meadow

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


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Terms and Conditions| 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®.