Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack

 It is currently 24 May 2017, 05:53

### 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

# In a certain wildlife park

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Intern
Joined: 06 May 2013
Posts: 14
Location: United States
GMAT 1: 700 Q49 V36
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 12 [1] , given: 2

In a certain wildlife park [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jan 2014, 01:40
1
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

65% (hard)

Question Stats:

58% (02:23) correct 42% (01:37) wrong based on 428 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

In a certain wildlife park, park rangers are able to track the movements of many rhinoceroses because those animals wear radio collars. When, as often happens, a collar slips off, it is put back on. Putting a collar on a rhinoceros involves immobilizing the animal by shooting it with a tranquilizer dart. Female rhinoceroses that have been frequently recollared have significant lower fetility rate than uncollared females. Probably, therefore, some subtances in the tranquilizer inhibit fertility.

Inevaluating the argument, it would be most useful to determine which of the following?
a. Whether there are more collared female rhinoceroses than uncollared female rhinoceroses in the park.
b. How the tranquilizer that is used for immobilizing rhinoceroses differs, if at all, from tranquilizers used in working with other large mammals.
c. How often park rangers need to use trangquilizer dart to immobilize rhinoceroses for reasons other than attaching radio collars.
d. Whether male rhinoceroses in the wild park lose their collar any more often than the park's female rhinoceroses do
e. Whether radio collar is the only pratical means that park rangers have for tracking the movements of rhinoceroses in the park.

Hello.

I have no doubt about the correct choice because it exploits the flaw in the argument.
But I still have a doubt about choice A.
The author makes a comparison between the fertility rates between 2 groups to support his conclusion. If there are 1000 recollared rhinos and 10 uncollared rhinos, and the fertility rates are 50% and 80% respectively, so we have 500 fertile recollared rhinos and 8 fertile uncollared rhinos.

if the difference between numbers of the two groups are too large-- i.e. 1000 and 10 -- and if we accept the author's assumption that the only purpose to shoot rhinos with T darts is to put collar, does the comparison between the fertile rates support the conclusion?

I must ask the question because before I see the correct answer I did not know the flaw of the argument, and the choice A seems good to me. So, if I know the answer for the question, I can eliminate choice A.

Thank you.
[Reveal] Spoiler: OA
If you have any questions
New!
Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 15 Apr 2013
Posts: 194
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Marketing
GMAT Date: 11-23-2015
GPA: 3.6
WE: Science (Other)
Followers: 17

Kudos [?]: 628 [0], given: 29

Re: In a certain wildlife park [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jan 2014, 03:34
Hi!

Premise clearly says "animals wear radio collars" that means "all animals does wear radio collars" so choice (A) is out of consideration for me.

Moreover conclusion of argument talks about the effect of tranquilizer of fertility rates. Choice A only deals in number and have no impact on the conclusion.

Regards
Vikas
Manhattan GMAT Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2012
Posts: 800
Followers: 367

Kudos [?]: 745 [1] , given: 5

Re: In a certain wildlife park [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Jan 2014, 12:45
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
This is a nice question with a good degree of difficulty. The key to these questions (evaluating the argument) is to understand assumptions, which are unstated elements that bridge the gap between premises and conclusions. On this question type, your answer will essentially be a question that asks for clarification about a key assumption. As you mentioned, C does provide a question focused on a key assumption (tranquilizers are only used for recollaring).

Now to your question regarding answer choice A. The reason why A would not be our answer is because the premise of the argument deals with fertility RATES not fertility numbers. The GMAT will often shift between figures and rates in the argument/answer choices to throw you off. The use of rates takes the actual numbers out of the equation (essentially normalizing/standardizing the data). Any answer choices that shift from rates to absolute numbers (or vice versa) will not be correct.

KW
_________________

Kyle Widdison | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | Utah

Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile

Manager
Status: suffer now and live forever as a champion!!!
Joined: 01 Sep 2013
Posts: 148
Location: India
GPA: 3.5
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 60 [0], given: 75

Re: In a certain wildlife park [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Apr 2014, 02:44
This Question says that tranquilizer(which is used to put collars on female rhinoceroses ) -> lower fertility rate .

To evaluate this arguments we need to find an assumption that either strenghtens or weakens the conclusion.

Choice C does that by Questioning whether tranquilizer is used only for the purpose of putting collars or Is that(tranquilizer) also used to for other purposes ?

If the first part is true, it strengthens the conclusion that Putting collars -> low fertility rate.
If the latter part is true, it weakens the conclusion that other cause -> low fertility rate .

Hope this helps
Senior Manager
Joined: 10 Mar 2013
Posts: 283
GMAT 1: 620 Q44 V31
GMAT 2: 690 Q47 V37
GMAT 3: 610 Q47 V28
GMAT 4: 700 Q50 V34
GMAT 5: 700 Q49 V36
GMAT 6: 690 Q48 V35
GMAT 7: 750 Q49 V42
GMAT 8: 730 Q50 V39
Followers: 12

Kudos [?]: 103 [0], given: 2405

Re: In a certain wildlife park [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Apr 2014, 06:48
I know that this is a Causation Question, but I don't know how any of the answers address the Causation assumptions that tranquilizers cause lower fertility rates.
Manhattan GMAT Instructor
Joined: 30 Apr 2012
Posts: 800
Followers: 367

Kudos [?]: 745 [1] , given: 5

Re: In a certain wildlife park [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Apr 2014, 13:18
1
KUDOS
Expert's post
TooLong150 wrote:
I know that this is a Causation Question, but I don't know how any of the answers address the Causation assumptions that tranquilizers cause lower fertility rates.

Well, only one of them will address the assumption.

The conclusion states that the tranquilizer inhibits fertility. This conclusion is based on the information that recollared rhinos have to be tranquilized in the process and recollared rhinos have lower fertility rates.

The question wants to you evaluate the argument - or in other words to determine what information you would like to have to assess the validity of the argument. To best evaluate the argument, you want some of the "missing" data related to tranquilizer use, recollaring and fertility. Answer choice C gets at that "missing" data by suggesting that there might be other uses for tranquilizers. If there are other uses, we lose our tight connection between recollaring, tranquilizers and fertility and, as a result, we have less confidence in the conclusion. If there are no other uses, that tight connection remains and our confidence in the conclusion increases.

To use your Causation language, the argument notices correlation between recollaring and fertility and asserts that tranquilizers are the cause of the correlation. Answer choice C suggests that we need to know if there are other uses for tranquilizers before we feel comfortable that they are causing the fertility problems.

KW
_________________

Kyle Widdison | Manhattan GMAT Instructor | Utah

Manhattan GMAT Discount | Manhattan GMAT Course Reviews | View Instructor Profile

GMAT Club Legend
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 10371
Followers: 997

Kudos [?]: 224 [0], given: 0

Re: In a certain wildlife park [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Sep 2015, 11:53
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.
Intern
Joined: 02 Sep 2016
Posts: 48
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 130

Re: In a certain wildlife park [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Oct 2016, 12:01
Really tricky question. I would have definitely done it wrong in the real GMAT based on time considerations and the level of pressure we are into ... I wish they never give such questions in real gmat
Manager
Joined: 18 Sep 2015
Posts: 109
GMAT 1: 610 Q43 V31
GMAT 2: 610 Q47 V27
GMAT 3: 650 Q48 V31
GMAT 4: 700 Q49 V35
WE: Project Management (Health Care)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 26 [0], given: 612

In a certain wildlife park [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Oct 2016, 04:09
phammanhhiep wrote:
In a certain wildlife park, park rangers are able to track the movements of many rhinoceroses because those animals wear radio collars. When, as often happens, a collar slips off, it is put back on. Putting a collar on a rhinoceros involves immobilizing the animal by shooting it with a tranquilizer dart. Female rhinoceroses that have been frequently recollared have significant lower fetility rate than uncollared females. Probably, therefore, some subtances in the tranquilizer inhibit fertility.

Inevaluating the argument, it would be most useful to determine which of the following?
a. Whether there are more collared female rhinoceroses than uncollared female rhinoceroses in the park.
b. How the tranquilizer that is used for immobilizing rhinoceroses differs, if at all, from tranquilizers used in working with other large mammals.
c. How often park rangers need to use trangquilizer dart to immobilize rhinoceroses for reasons other than attaching radio collars.
d. Whether male rhinoceroses in the wild park lose their collar any more often than the park's female rhinoceroses do
e. Whether radio collar is the only pratical means that park rangers have for tracking the movements of rhinoceroses in the park.

Hello.

I have no doubt about the correct choice because it exploits the flaw in the argument.
But I still have a doubt about choice A.
The author makes a comparison between the fertility rates between 2 groups to support his conclusion. If there are 1000 recollared rhinos and 10 uncollared rhinos, and the fertility rates are 50% and 80% respectively, so we have 500 fertile recollared rhinos and 8 fertile uncollared rhinos.

if the difference between numbers of the two groups are too large-- i.e. 1000 and 10 -- and if we accept the author's assumption that the only purpose to shoot rhinos with T darts is to put collar, does the comparison between the fertile rates support the conclusion?

I must ask the question because before I see the correct answer I did not know the flaw of the argument, and the choice A seems good to me. So, if I know the answer for the question, I can eliminate choice A.

Thank you.

Tricky question.

Premises:
- Radio Collar (R.C) enables Tracking.
- R.C -> tranquilizing (T)
- More R.C -> lower Death Rare (Causal relationship)
----
Assumption:
- More Fertility -> Less Death

Comment:
- Notice the gap between the premises (Death Rate-DR) and (Fertility-F)
- Hence we should deduce correlation, and more specifically causality
- But in what direction? does DR->F or F->DR
- Well, logically F->DR makes sense, the other way does not make sense

----
Conclusion:
- Tranquilizer (a material in it) -> more fertility

Question Analysis:
A. This comparison have nothing to do with the assumption or conclusion- and hence not relevant.
B. Again, This comparison have nothing to do with the assumption or conclusion.
C. Sounds good - lets try to weaken & strengthen the conclusion by taking 2 extreme cases:
- Now, look at the structure again:
- More Tranq. -> More Fertility -> Less death
- a good way to understand the implications of an answer choice is by taking a specific example and analyze its impact.
- So if other uses CAUSE Tranq. ( something else -> Tranq) - for example pregnancy, then we are weaken the relationship "More Tranq.->More Fertility". why? because Fertility->Pregnancy->Tranq.
- Now if we negate that option, we have in fact negated an alternate weakener - which strengthen the conclusion.

Hence C is correct,

D.The sample group (males) is not relevant, as is the comparison.
E. Assume with have another practical means- this does not weaken the conclusion.
Verbal Expert
Joined: 14 Dec 2013
Posts: 3041
Location: Germany
Schools: HHL Leipzig
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V47
WE: Corporate Finance (Pharmaceuticals and Biotech)
Followers: 513

Kudos [?]: 2261 [0], given: 22

Re: In a certain wildlife park [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Nov 2016, 10:09
The OA is correct and explanation provided above appears sufficient. If there are any specific questions, please post them here and then click again on the "Request Expert Reply" button.
Re: In a certain wildlife park   [#permalink] 25 Nov 2016, 10:09
Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
In a certain wildlife park, park rangers are able 2 08 Dec 2014, 21:43
In a certain wildlife park, park rangers are able to track 0 13 Jan 2013, 02:52
3 In a certain wildlife park, park rangers are able to track 8 06 Nov 2016, 00:30
In a certain wildlife park, park rangers are able to track 0 02 Sep 2016, 13:25
83 In a certain wildlife park, park rangers are able to track 55 16 Oct 2016, 10:40
Display posts from previous: Sort by