Last visit was: 01 May 2026, 14:43

It is currently 01 May 2026, 14:43

Toolkit

Practice Tests

Critical Reasoning (CR)

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.

Go to My Error Log Learn more

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Back to Forum

Create Topic

Insect infestations in certain cotton-growing regions of the world hav

1 2 3

blitzkriegxX

Joined: 28 Jun 2018

Last visit: 28 May 2019

Posts: 89

Own Kudos:

255

Given Kudos: 329

Location: Bouvet Island

GMAT 1: 640 Q47 V30 Verified score

GMAT 2: 670 Q50 V31 Verified score

GMAT 3: 700 Q49 V36 Verified score

GMAT 4: 490 Q39 V18 Verified score

GPA: 4

GMAT 4: 490 Q39 V18 Verified score

Posts: 89

Kudos: 255

16 Jan 2019, 00:42

Kudos

Bookmarks

GMATNinja

I have a slightly different perspective on option E! Yes! Option E that none have struggled eliminating!

(E) The species of insect that has infested cotton plants has never been known to attack soybean plants.

All these people grew soybeans all these years. So they do not really know if their land has insects that are known to attack cotton.
So according to option E, the insects that attack cotton and soy are not the same.
So maybe the insects might attack the cotton because it is something common there?

I guess I am sliding into the "if/maybe" dimension again?

AlN

Joined: 02 Jan 2017

Last visit: 19 Dec 2023

Posts: 53

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 23

Location: India

Schools: Oxford "21

Posts: 53

Kudos: 7

30 Jan 2019, 08:00

Kudos

Bookmarks

I am stillnot able to understand why Option C is wrong

DavidTutorexamPAL

examPAL Representative

Joined: 07 Dec 2017

Last visit: 09 Sep 2020

Posts: 1,002

Own Kudos:

2,043

Given Kudos: 26

Posts: 1,002

Kudos: 2,043

30 Jan 2019, 08:35

Kudos

Bookmarks

AlN

I am stillnot able to understand why Option C is wrong

The plan is to stop producing cotton, and start producing soybeans.
Therefore, anything that makes cotton less attractive will only strengthen the plan. This is what C does, by telling us the price for cotton hasn't gone up.
So C strengthens, not weakens, the plan.

VeritasPrepBrian

Veritas Prep Representative

Joined: 26 Jul 2010

Last visit: 02 Mar 2022

Posts: 416

Own Kudos:

3,270

[1]

Given Kudos: 63

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 416

Kudos: 3,270

[1]

30 Jan 2019, 10:15

Kudos

Bookmarks

AlN

I am stillnot able to understand why Option C is wrong

Another take on C - what C is trying to do is suggest that without a sharp increase in demand, then the conclusion that "cotton will increase their income significantly" is invalid. But note that there are two factors in classic pricing: supply and demand. And the first sentence of the stimulus shows us that supply is down *and* even more importantly that prices are way up ("dramatic increases in the price"). So we don't need a sharp increase in demand like C might make us think - we already know that the price is up. And note that the conclusion even says "at least in the next several years," suggesting that we don't need this shortened supply to last forever or demand to kick up sharply - the conclusion is limited to this time frame in which we know that the price is up.

Insect infestations in certain cotton-growing regions of the world have caused dramatic increases in the price of cotton on the world market. By contrast, the price of soybeans has long remained stable. Knowing that cotton plants mature quickly, many soybean growers in Ortovia plan to cease growing soybeans and begin raising cotton instead, thereby taking advantage of the high price of cotton to increase their income significantly, at least over the next several years.

(C) In the past several years, there has been no sharp increase in the demand for cotton and for goods made out of cotton.

GMATNinja

GMAT Club Verbal Expert

Joined: 13 Aug 2009

Last visit: 01 May 2026

Posts: 7,391

Own Kudos:

70,843

[3]

Given Kudos: 2,133

Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors

Location: United States (CO)

GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46 Verified score

GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

GRE 1: Q170 V170 Verified score

GRE 2: Q170 V170 Verified score

Products:

Expert

Expert reply

GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

GRE 1: Q170 V170 Verified score

GRE 2: Q170 V170 Verified score

Posts: 7,391

Kudos: 70,843

[3]

06 Feb 2019, 15:15

Kudos

Bookmarks

blitzkriegxX

GMATNinja

I have a slightly different perspective on option E! Yes! Option E that none have struggled eliminating!

Let's stay focused on the conclusion we're given, then ask whether choice (E) weakens that specific conclusion.

We know that the plan is for soybean farmers to cease growing soybeans and begin raising cotton instead. This plan will "increase [the farmers'] income significantly" by taking advantage of the high price of cotton. The correct answer choice is the one that most seriously weakens the plan's chance of success.

Answer choice (E) states:

Quote:

The species of insect that has infested cotton plants has never been known to attack soybean plants.

This tells us that soybean plants have never been attacked by the insects that infested the cotton plants. Therefore, it's unlikely that this insect infestation will affect soybean plants in the same way it has affected cotton plants.

So what? This information does not weaken the plan's chance of success, because it does not change the evidence that the farmers used to justify their plan in the first place (the dramatically high price of cotton and the stable price of soybeans). If anything, this choice reinforces why we expect the price of soybeans to remain stable.

As for your analysis: yes, you're sliding into "if/maybe" here.

Let's clarify.

The passage states that the insect infestation occurred in "certain cotton-growing regions of the world." Answer choice (E) does not provide any evidence that Ortovia is in one of those regions. Also, the fact that soybean plants are not attacked by the same species that infested cotton plants does not provide any evidence that this species does live in Ortovia. Therefore, we cannot infer that the insects are present based on the information in the answer choice.

On the other hand, the information provided by answer choice (B) directly undermines the plan by providing a reason to doubt that the cotton infestation will continue -- consequently lowering expectations that the dramatic increases in the price of cotton will last. So (B) is a much better option than (E).

I hope that helps!

sharathnair14

Joined: 05 May 2019

Last visit: 27 May 2020

Posts: 160

Own Kudos:

367

Given Kudos: 221

Schools: LBS '25 ISB '25 Manchester'26 Stern '26 Tuck '26 INSEAD Aug'24 intake Yale '26 Kellogg '26 Wharton '26

GPA: 3

Schools: LBS '25 ISB '25 Manchester'26 Stern '26 Tuck '26 INSEAD Aug'24 intake Yale '26 Kellogg '26 Wharton '26

Posts: 160

Kudos: 367

19 Aug 2019, 04:45

Kudos

Bookmarks

pqhai

infymys

I chose C!
because B talks about a pesticide that would kill IF USED..
but we aren't sure whether it's going to be used right?
So i went for C!

What's wrong with my explanation?
I remmeber seeing plenty of questions where correct answer wasn't a probability of some even happening!

Hi infymys

The idea of the question is supply of cotton decreases ---> prices of cotton increase --> more profits for growers of cotton.

Let analyze B and C

B. Tests of a newly developed, inexpensive pesticide have shown it to be both environmentally safe and effective against the insects that have infected the cotton crops.
Correct. B clearly says the new pesticide is effectively against the insects --> Supply of cotton will increase --> price of cotton will reduce. Your thought is whether the pesticide is used right? You infer too far. We can't infer that the farmers don't know how to use the new pesticide properly. You should keep in mind that "weaken" is not "destroy". Even the answer weakens 1% of the conclusion, the answer DOES weaken the conclusion and is correct. It does not have to destroy (weaken 100%) the conclusion.

C. In the past several years, there has been no sharp increase in the demand for cotton, and for goods made out of cotton.
Wrong. C just says demand does not increase. Price will increase if the supply decreases while demand stay the same! Let imagine:
Before: Demand = 100, Supply = 100 ==> D & S meet each other.
After: Demand = 100 (No increase!), but Supply reduces to 50 --> Clearly price will increase.
Thus, C is wrong.

Hope it helps.

The supply has decreased because the insect infestations have reduced the yields, yeah?

Kinshook

Major Poster

Joined: 03 Jun 2019

Last visit: 01 May 2026

Posts: 5,991

Own Kudos:

5,865

Given Kudos: 163

Location: India

Schools: HBS '26 CBS '26 Wharton '26

GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V34 Verified score

WE:Engineering (Transportation)

Products:

Schools: HBS '26 CBS '26 Wharton '26

GMAT 1: 690 Q50 V34 Verified score

Posts: 5,991

Kudos: 5,865

19 Aug 2019, 06:09

Kudos

Bookmarks

prasannar

Source : GMATPrep Default Exam Pack

Insect infestations in certain cotton-growing regions of the world have caused dramatic increases in the price of cotton on the world market. By contrast, the price of soybeans has long remained stable. Knowing that cotton plants mature quickly, many soybean growers in Ortovia plan to cease growing soybeans and begin raising cotton instead, thereby taking advantage of the high price of cotton to increase their income significantly, at least over the next several years.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the plan’s chances for success?

(A) The cost of raising soybeans has increased significantly over the past several years and is expected to continue to climb.

(B) Tests of a newly developed, inexpensive pesticide have shown it to be both environmentally safe and effective against the insects that have infested cotton crops.

(C) In the past several years, there has been no sharp increase in the demand for cotton and for goods made out of cotton.

(D) Few consumers would be willing to pay significantly higher prices for cotton goods than they are now paying.

(E) The species of insect that has infested cotton plants has never been known to attack soybean plants.

Show SpoilerSCREENSHOT

Attachment:

cr1 - prep2.jpg

(B) Tests of a newly developed, inexpensive pesticide have shown it to be both environmentally safe and effective against the insects that have infested cotton crops.

Weaken's most seriously weakens the plan’s chances for success

IMO B

energetics

Joined: 05 Feb 2018

Last visit: 09 Oct 2020

Posts: 294

Own Kudos:

975

Given Kudos: 325

Posts: 294

Kudos: 975

02 Oct 2019, 12:13

Kudos

Bookmarks

prasannar

P1: Cotton prices are up
P2: Soybean prices are stable
C1: Price of cotton will remain high over several years, so they will increase their income significantly by growing it

(A) The cost of raising soybeans has increased significantly over the past several years and is expected to continue to climb.
Opposite, actually strengthens somewhat.

(B) Tests of a newly developed, inexpensive pesticide have shown it to be both environmentally safe and effective against the insects that have infested cotton crops.
Gives an alternate reason why this plan wouldn't work. Presumably the pesticide will be used and production will return to normal levels, lowering the price.

(C) In the past several years, there has been no sharp increase in the demand for cotton and for goods made out of cotton.
Doesn't help weaken, if demand is equal to prior levels then there is still a gap in the supply needed to fill it.

(D) Few consumers would be willing to pay significantly higher prices for cotton goods than they are now paying.
Completely out of scope.

(E) The species of insect that has infested cotton plants has never been known to attack soybean plants.
Opposite, actually strengthens.

dcummins

Joined: 14 Feb 2017

Last visit: 16 Mar 2026

Posts: 1,021

Own Kudos:

2,379

Given Kudos: 368

Location: Australia

Concentration: Technology, Strategy

Schools: INSEAD Sept'21 Intake (WA$$$) Melbourne (A$$$$) AGSM (A$$$$) Kellogg '23 (WL) Said '22 (A$$$$) CBS '23 (D) Booth '23 (WA) Anderson '23 (WA) Cambridge '22 (WL) LBS '23 (D) Stern '24 (WA)

GMAT 1: 560 Q41 V26 Verified score

GMAT 2: 550 Q43 V23 Verified score

GMAT 3: 650 Q47 V33 Verified score

GMAT 4: 650 Q44 V36 Verified score

GMAT 5: 600 Q38 V35 Verified score

GMAT 6: 710 Q47 V41 Verified score

WE:Management Consulting (Consulting)

Products:

Schools: INSEAD Sept'21 Intake (WA$$$) Melbourne (A$$$$) AGSM (A$$$$) Kellogg '23 (WL) Said '22 (A$$$$) CBS '23 (D) Booth '23 (WA) Anderson '23 (WA) Cambridge '22 (WL) LBS '23 (D) Stern '24 (WA)

GMAT 6: 710 Q47 V41 Verified score

Posts: 1,021

Kudos: 2,379

08 Oct 2019, 19:26

Kudos

Bookmarks

Plan: cease growing Soy, grow cotton to take advantage of high price of cotton to increase income significantly
p1: inset infestations caused dramatic increases in price of cotton on world market
p1:price soybeans remain stable

Weaken chance for success:
A - Incorrect - Increase in Soy doesn't weaken chance for success of Cotton
B - (potentially - could alleviate problem causing prices to be so high)
C - Incorrect- no sharp increase doesn't impact current high price of Cotton
D - Incorrect - they are currently paying 'high' prices, and the plan doesn't say anything about charging "higher" amounts
E - Incorrect - Doesn't impact the plan to grow cotton, it just solidifies the case that Soy is stable

OhMy

Joined: 11 Feb 2018

Last visit: 15 Nov 2022

Posts: 41

Own Kudos:

113

Given Kudos: 125

Status:resting for now

Location: Germany

Concentration: Technology, Strategy

Products:

Posts: 41

Kudos: 113

10 Apr 2020, 08:41

Kudos

Bookmarks

AVRonaldo

prasannar

I am not sure if anyone has noticed it yet. But this question has been slightly modified in the current GmatPrep version.

The option (D) " Few consumers would be willing to pay significantly higher prices for cotton goods than they are now paying"
has been replaced with
(D) "Many consumers consider cotton cloth a necessity rather than a luxury and would be willing to pay significantly higher prices for cotton goods than they currently pay"

I don't think it's a variant of the same question because everything else remains unchanged (argument lines, weaken question, rest of the 4 choices & correct answer choice).

Yes, they also changed the question a bit and moved a sentence of the argument.

The question stem:

"Insect infestations in certain cotton-growing regions of the world have caused dramatic increases in the price of cotton on the world market. By contrast, the price of soybeans has long remained stable. Knowing that cotton plants mature quickly, many soybean growers in Ortovia plan to cease growing soybeans and begin raising cotton instead, thereby taking advantage of the high price of cotton to increase their income significantly, at least over the next several years.

Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the plan’s chances for success?"

has been replaced with

"Insect infestations in certain cotton-growing regions of the world have caused dramatic increases in the price of cotton on the world market. Knowing that cotton plants mature quickly, many soybean growers in Ortovia plan to cease growing soybeans, the price of which has long been stable, and to begin raising cotton instead, thereby taking advantage of the high price of cotton to increase their income significantly at least over the next several years.

Which of the following, if true, most calls into question the reasoning on which the plan is based?"

mba757

Current Student

Joined: 15 Jun 2020

Last visit: 04 Aug 2022

Posts: 295

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 245

Location: United States

Schools: Darden '24 (A) Fuqua '24 (WL) Kellogg '24 (D)

GPA: 3.3

Schools: Darden '24 (A) Fuqua '24 (WL) Kellogg '24 (D)

Posts: 295

Kudos: 97

06 Sep 2020, 13:15

Kudos

Bookmarks

Conclusion: [many soybean growers in Ortovia plan to cease growing soybeans, the price of which has long been stable, and to begin raising cotton instead] taking advantage of the high price of cotton to increase their income
Prethink: what if everyone switching over crops deflates the price? The insect infestation presumably destroyed the cotton crops in certain regions, raising the prices because of a shortage (presumably). If everyone hops over and there’s a surplus, this could normalize the price.

A. The cost of raising soybeans has increased significantly over the past several years and is expected to continue to climb.
Out of scope/opposite – we don’t care about the cost of raising SOYBEANS. We want to focus on the cotton plants and how it could potentially be beneficial to growers. But if anything, this raising cost of soybeans would give more the reason for farmers to hop over to cotton, enabling farmers to take advantage of the high price of cotton.

B. Tests of a newly developed, inexpensive pesticide have shown it to be both environmentally safe and effective against the insects that have infected cotton crops.
Bingo. This would remove the piece that boosted up prices of the cotton, resulting in a normalized price.

C. In the past several years there has been no sharp increase in the demand for cotton and for goods made out of cotton.
Out of scope – This more targeted towards the past. The farmers’ intentions lie within the future. B is a stronger weakener.

D. Many consumers consider cotton cloth a necessity rather than a luxury and would be willing to pay significantly higher prices for cotton goods than they currently pay.
Opposite – this further substantiates and provides another reason for why the prices are going up. Would further support the farmers’ reasoning to jump ship.

E. The species of insect that has infested cotton plants has never been known to attack soybean plants
This keep everything neutral. Doesn’t affect the argument at all. If anything, this would help support because this would provide more clarity.

BostonTC2018

Current Student

Joined: 03 May 2020

Last visit: 02 Jun 2022

Posts: 38

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 20

Location: United States (MA)

Schools: Yale '24 Wharton '24 Stern '24 Harvard '24 (A) Johnson '24 (WD) Columbia CBS '24 (A$)

GMAT 1: 740 Q48 V42 Verified score

GPA: 3.6

Schools: Yale '24 Wharton '24 Stern '24 Harvard '24 (A) Johnson '24 (WD) Columbia CBS '24 (A$)

GMAT 1: 740 Q48 V42 Verified score

Posts: 38

Kudos: 10

01 Mar 2021, 06:18

Kudos

Bookmarks

I guessed answer C and I haven't seen anyone argue my logic, so here it goes:

Currently, let's say that the supply of cotton is at 100 before the soybean farmers enter the cotton market. Let's also assume that the demand = 100, so there's a 1 to 1 relationship. If there has been no sharp increase in demand, then the supply will increase when the soybean farmers enter the market. Let's say this shifts the supply to = 200. What happens when there's any increase in supply while holding demand constant? The prices go down.

If the prices go down, then the income of the farmers will be reduced.

I realize that this answer requires too many assumptions / logical bounds, but just wanted to share my thoughts incase someone else had them

.

Answer is B, btw

mSKR

Joined: 14 Aug 2019

Last visit: 10 Mar 2024

Posts: 1,210

Own Kudos:

961

Given Kudos: 381

Location: Hong Kong

Concentration: Strategy, Marketing

Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22

GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29 Verified score

GPA: 3.81

Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22

GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29 Verified score

Posts: 1,210

Kudos: 961

01 Mar 2021, 07:53

Kudos

Bookmarks

BostonTC2018

.

Answer is B, btw

Thanks BostonTC2018 for sharing your thoughts. But you missed some points of other side.

Currently, let's say that the supply of cotton is at 100 before the soybean farmers enter the cotton market. Let's also assume that the demand = 100, so there's a 1 to 1 relationship. If there has been no sharp increase in demand, then the supply will increase when the soybean farmers enter the market. Let's say this shifts the supply to = 200( not necessary, why?).

Because you missed KEY POINT: Insect infestations. It is because of Insect infestations, prices of cotton are high. Who knows after farmers produce supply, maybe 90% get infested? ( 90% would weaken the conclusion) but what if 1% get infested( then it strengthens) . In short, I have open end with this option.

Second Hint: What happens in history , how can you guarantee that same thing will happen in future. Example: Maybe in past several years, Insect infestations was not severe. But suddenly supply is reduced to minimal. All have open ends . So we cant weaken the conclusion.

In B , we have limited challenges. Now we have environmentally safe , inexpensive pesticide and effective against cotton.
What more else do you want?

Now you can not challenge B as much as you can challenge C.

Did you enjoy reading my analysis ?

I hope it helps:)

CrackverbalGMAT

Major Poster

Joined: 03 Oct 2013

Last visit: 01 May 2026

Posts: 4,846

Own Kudos:

9,188

Given Kudos: 226

Affiliations: CrackVerbal

Location: India

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 4,846

Kudos: 9,188

23 Apr 2021, 01:05

Kudos

Bookmarks

Let’s look at the premises and conclusion of the argument-

Insect infestations have caused dramatic increases in the price of cotton on the world market
the price of soybeans has long remained stable
cotton plants mature quickly

soybean growers’ plan (what we have to weaken)

to cease growing soybeans and begin raising cotton instead, thereby taking advantage of the high price of cotton to increase their income significantly, at least over the next several years.

The plan is to substitute soybean with cotton to take advantage of the high price of cotton and increase their income significantly.

(A) The cost of raising soybeans has increased significantly over the past several years and is expected to continue to climb.
This only provides all the more support to the soybean growers to cease growing soybeans and begin raising cotton instead. Eliminate.

(B) Tests of a newly developed, inexpensive pesticide have shown it to be both environmentally safe and effective against the insects that have infested cotton crops.

In that case, it will affect the dramatic increase in the price of cotton. If there’s no increase in the price of cotton, then the plan of soybean growers to cultivate cotton instead of soybeans will be in vain. This weakens the plan’s chances for success and is hence the correct answer.

(C) In the past several years, there has been no sharp increase in the demand for cotton and for goods made out of cotton.
The premise states that there has been a dramatic increase in the price of cotton. Option C does not impact the conclusion. Eliminate.

(D) Few consumers would be willing to pay significantly higher prices for cotton goods than they are now paying.
The conclusion is drawn on the basis of the current prices. Eliminate.

(E) The species of insect that has infested cotton plants has never been known to attack soybean plants.
Not relevant. The plan is to cease growing soybeans and grow cotton instead. Eliminate.

Vishnupriya
GMAT Verbal SME

KBCsquare

Joined: 19 Apr 2021

Last visit: 09 May 2021

Posts: 3

Given Kudos: 4

Posts: 3

Kudos: 0

02 May 2021, 12:10

Kudos

Bookmarks

ChrisLele

Farmers want to replace soybean crops with cotton crops to take advantage of the increase in cotton prices worldwide. The increase in cotton prices has resulted from an insect infestation of cotton crops, which has led to the destruction of cotton crops and thus the increase in prices.

The farmers' plan would not work if the cotton price returned to normal. Which one of the following answers gives a reason that cotton prices could drop?

(B) Tests of a newly developed, inexpensive pesticide have shown it to be both environmentally safe and effective against the insects that have infected the cotton crops.

Here we have a reason the price of cotton crops could return to normal. Pesticides would kill of the insects. Without the insects destroying cotton crop the price would return to normal.

Hope that helps

What you are saying makes sense, but think of this, referring to option E, what if the pests were ever present but did not attack the soyabean plants, so never realized, once the shift is made, they may well infest the cotton produced by these farmers?

maelstrom93

Joined: 12 Nov 2021

Last visit: 13 Nov 2022

Posts: 10

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 20

Posts: 10

Kudos: 1

30 Jan 2022, 08:17

Kudos

Bookmarks

D: Few consumers would be willing to pay significantly higher prices for cotton goods than they are now paying.

Higher price = higher revenue = does not mean higher profit (income)

skertdawg

Joined: 29 Nov 2021

Last visit: 17 May 2023

Posts: 8

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 15

Location: United States

Concentration: Healthcare, Technology

Schools: BU Questrom '25 (A$$$) Cornell '25 (A$) Ross '25 (WA) Tuck '25 (WL) HBS '25 (D) Sloan '25 (D)

Posts: 8

Kudos: 10

05 Nov 2022, 08:01

Kudos

Bookmarks

I just got this wrong on the official GMAT Prep 2. I see a lot of reasons here why B is correct, but none explaining away E. To my understanding, they both provide about the same level of weakness?

B) Weakens the conclusion because if there is a pesticide shown to be effective at preventing insect infestations, then cotton prices will return to normal (assuming the farmers use them and that they fight of the insects within the "several years" mentioned)

E) Weakens the conclusion because if the insects do not attack soybeans, then the farmers may be harboring the insects and not know until they plant cotton.

Can someone help me here?

nkulkarni234

Joined: 27 Sep 2021

Last visit: 14 Jun 2023

Posts: 1

Given Kudos: 3

Location: United States

Posts: 1

Kudos: 0

07 Nov 2022, 08:09

Kudos

Bookmarks

pqhai

infymys

I actually chose C as my answer because I used the similar logic but interpreted it differently. The conclusion of the paragraph says, "many soybean growers in Ortovia plan to cease growing soybeans, the price of which has long been stable, and to begin raising cotton instead, thereby taking advantage of the high price of cotton to increase their income significantly at least over the next several years.".

My thought process was: because demand is NOT growing for cotton, then when all of these new soybean farmers join the cotton farming industry, it will saturate the industry and supply will spike, which in turn will make prices decrease. I chose C because in my opinion, this fact calls this plan into question. Thoughts?

GMATNinja

GMAT Club Verbal Expert

Joined: 13 Aug 2009

Last visit: 01 May 2026

Posts: 7,391

Own Kudos:

70,843

[2]

Given Kudos: 2,133

Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors

Location: United States (CO)

GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46 Verified score

GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

GRE 1: Q170 V170 Verified score

GRE 2: Q170 V170 Verified score

Products:

Expert

Expert reply

GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

GRE 1: Q170 V170 Verified score

GRE 2: Q170 V170 Verified score

Posts: 7,391

Kudos: 70,843

[2]

17 Nov 2022, 08:19

Kudos

Bookmarks

scurrier

As you suggest, if the cotton grown in Ortovia gets infested by those nasty insects, that could weaken the argument. But does (E) suggest that's likely? Not really.

Quote:

(E) The species of insect that has infested cotton plants has never been known to attack soybean plants.

While your line of reasoning is pretty creative, notice all the assumptions it requires.

First, we'd need to assume that the cotton-destroying insects are present on the soy beans grown in Ortovia, or that they even exist in Ortovia in the first place. These are pretty big leaps, and are probably the weakest links the chain. After all, if the insects don't attack soy beans, why would they infest them?

Second, we'd need to assume the insects wouldn't be detected by the growers in Ortovia. This is also a big leap. Keep in mind -- just because the insects don't destroy soybean plants doesn't mean they wouldn't be detected in some other way.

Third, we'd need to assume that the insects would somehow be transferred from the soy bean plants to the newly grown cotton.

Given that (E) requires three big leaps, it's hard to conclude that it "most seriously weakens the plan's chances for success."

Let's now consider (B):

Quote:

(B) Tests of a newly developed, inexpensive pesticide have shown it to be both environmentally safe and effective against the insects that have infested cotton crops.

The fact that the newly developed pesticide is inexpensive, environmentally safe, and effective suggests that it could probably be widely used to kill the insects. This inference isn't airtight, but it doesn't require any huge leaps, as (E) does. For that reason, it's a better answer, and (B) is correct.

I hope that helps!

nkulkarni234

pqhai

infymys

As you suggest, this passage hinges on the idea that a reduced supply of cotton caused the dramatic increase in its price on the world market. So it's only logical to conclude that a sufficiently large supply could cause the price to fall again.

However, notice that (D) talks about the demand for cotton, not the supply. Theoretically, if an answer choice said something like "Ortovia is likely to grow as much cotton as the market lost due to the insect infestation in the first place," that could support your line of reasoning. As it is, however, we have no clue as to the size of the Ortovian cotton industry. Is it gigantic? Is it miniscule? We really have no idea. So to conclude that it will significantly impact the global supply of cotton requires an unsupported leap. And for that reason, we can eliminate (D).

I hope that helps!

NakulDiwakar10

Joined: 14 Jun 2021

Last visit: 18 Mar 2026

Posts: 141

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 65

Location: India

Products:

Posts: 141

Kudos: 33

17 Apr 2023, 07:19

Kudos

Bookmarks

IMO answer is b)
If pesticide is available for cotton crops, their yield won't get affected. As a result, price will fall down and profits will go down too.