Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
21 Oct 2025, 05:59
Kudos
Bookmarks
catcun
catcun the word "attributable" does make option E seem flexible enough to be correct! The issue with E is that it reverses the logical direction established in the passage.
What the passage establishes:
Drought → Algae decline → Insect larvae decline → Minnows/frogs decline
This shows that algae decline CAN cause minnow/frog populations to decline (it's one sufficient pathway).
What option E claims:
"If minnows and frogs fail to prosper, it is attributable to a decline in the population of algae"
This assumes that whenever minnows/frogs decline, algae decline IS the explanation. But here's the problem: Could minnows and frogs fail to prosper for completely different reasons? Absolutely—predators, disease, water pollution, temperature changes, habitat destruction, etc.
The passage only shows us one specific causal chain. It never establishes that algae decline is the primary, typical, or necessary cause of minnow/frog population problems. Therefore, we cannot infer that any given instance of minnow/frog decline "is attributable to" algae decline.
Even though "attributable" sounds softer than "must be due to," it still makes a claim we cannot support: that algae decline is the explanation (or even a likely explanation) when we observe minnow/frog decline. The passage simply doesn't give us that information.
Hope this answers your question.
Moderators:
