Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 08:58 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 08:58
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
User avatar
kornn
Joined: 28 Jan 2017
Last visit: 18 Dec 2021
Posts: 357
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 832
Posts: 357
Kudos: 93
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
AnthonyRitz
User avatar
Stacy Blackman Consulting Director of Test Prep
Joined: 21 Dec 2014
Last visit: 16 Nov 2025
Posts: 238
Own Kudos:
427
 [3]
Given Kudos: 169
Affiliations: Stacy Blackman Consulting
Location: United States (DC)
GMAT 1: 790 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
GPA: 3.11
WE:Education (Education)
GMAT 1: 790 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 238
Kudos: 427
 [3]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Mrozhko
Joined: 15 May 2020
Last visit: 02 May 2023
Posts: 10
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 65
Location: United Kingdom
GPA: 4
Posts: 10
Kudos: 2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
avatar
Nimabinia
Joined: 26 Mar 2017
Last visit: 05 Jan 2022
Posts: 13
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 12
Posts: 13
Kudos: 1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
There is a lot of confusing answers/explanation on answer choice A, and I would like to offer my two cents here.
A is a tempting choice because when other species is added, the white foot mice population is diluted, hence, lowering tick infection rate. The problem of A is that the negation of A won't help swing the argument to the opposite side.
Other species are not added only to where the white foot mices are. What it shows is that other species are basically everywhere, including where white foot mices are. This negation has the same effect, leading the reader to believe that the argument is still true. If the negation doens't impact the argument in the opposite direction, it makes the answer incorrect.

I want to point out that a lot ppl in this forum claimed that A is out of scope. It is not, don't believe that is the answer you are looking for. Some may argue that deek ticks might have preference on host they feed. This assumption is not stated anywhere in the original question. Even if this is true, you most likely have to apply to all other choices as well, hence, making B funny as well.
avatar
A1212
avatar
Current Student
Joined: 31 Jul 2020
Last visit: 06 Apr 2022
Posts: 51
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 60
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
GMAT 1: 660 Q42 V39
GPA: 3.4
WE:Law (Law)
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATIntensive GMATNinja @E-GMAT

Having a hard time understanding this question? Could you please shed some light on Options A B and D?

Thank you.
User avatar
Rasalghul853
Joined: 24 Jan 2019
Last visit: 15 Jan 2024
Posts: 148
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 85
Location: India
GMAT 1: 740 Q50 V39
GPA: 2.81
Products:
GMAT 1: 740 Q50 V39
Posts: 148
Kudos: 43
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Can somebody please explain why B is correct? I am still not clear on this.
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,784
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A1212
GMATIntensive GMATNinja @E-GMAT

Having a hard time understanding this question? Could you please shed some light on Options A B and D?

Thank you.
Check out our earlier analysis of answer choices (A) and (D) here, and our analysis of answer choice (B) here. Let us know whether that clears things up!
User avatar
gmatimothy
Joined: 18 Apr 2022
Last visit: 19 Dec 2022
Posts: 111
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 704
Location: United States
Posts: 111
Kudos: 9
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
jjhko
Lyme disease is caused by a bacterium transmitted to humans by deer ticks. Generally deer ticks pick up the bacterium while in the larval stage from feeding on infected whitefooted mice. However, certain other species on which the larvae feed do not harbor the bacterium. Therefore, if the population of these other species were increased, the number of ticks acquiring the bacterium and hence the number of people contracting Lyme disease—would likely decline.

Which of the following it would be most useful to ascertain in evaluating the argument?

Conclusion: increase in other species -> decrease in # of infected ticks

A. Whether populations of the other species on which deer tick larvae feed are found only in areas also inhabited by white footed mice.

We don't know if this is going to decrease the infected deer ticks. Need to make a lot of additional assumptions to get there.

B. Whether the size of the deer tick population is currently limited by the availability of animals for ticks ‘s larval stage to feed on

We might immediately remove this choice because it seems out of scope (as this choice doesn't mention "other species") BUT it mentions about "animals for ticks' larval stage to feed on" and still relevant to the conclusion.

To further analyze, let's reject this statement. If the size of deer tick population isn't limited by availability of animals, then that means introduction of "other species" will not increase the population of the existing deer tickets; and therefore, some who are feeding on white footed mice will now feed on the other species - reducing the # of infected deer ticks. There will be higher share of non-infected deer ticks thanks to this introduction relative to before the introduction. Therefore, (B) is the answer.


C. Whether the infected deer tick population could be controlled by increasing the number of animals that prey on white footed mice.

D. Whether deer ticks that were not infected as larvae can become infected as adults by feeding on deer on which infected deer ticks have fed.

It doesn't matter whether they can become infected as adults. Argument already states that "Generally deer ticks pick up the bacterium while in the larval stage from feeding on infected whitefooted mice."

Our goal is to reduce (even by 0.0001%) of the # of infected ticks through the other species. To achieve that goal, (D) is irrelevant.


E. Whether the other species on which deer tick larvae feed harbor any other bacteria that ticks transmits to humans.


"Lyme disease" Complete the Passage Question
"Lyme disease" Strengthen Question


Source : GMATPrep Default Exam Pack
User avatar
himanshu0123
Joined: 27 Mar 2016
Last visit: 20 Mar 2023
Posts: 190
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 101
Posts: 190
Kudos: 5
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
does option B] mean that deer tick population is low in number because whitefooted mice are low in number.

And if we increase more animals on which deer tick feed on, population of deer tick will increase to a larger number
User avatar
RonTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 19 Jul 2022
Last visit: 07 Nov 2022
Posts: 430
Own Kudos:
537
 [1]
Given Kudos: 1
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51
Posts: 430
Kudos: 537
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
himanshu0123
does option B] mean that deer tick population is low in number because whitefooted mice are low in number.

The bold underlined part shouldn't just be white-footed mice—it should be white-footed mice AND other animals on which larval (= baby) deer ticks live.

The deer ticks pick up Lyme disease only from white-footed mice, but they'll happily feed on the mice OR "certain other species". They're indifferent—feeding on the other species is just as good as feeding on the mice. The ticks don't really care, since they don't get Lyme disease; they just carry it and pass it on to humans.


Quote:
And if we increase more animals on which deer tick feed on, population of deer tick will increase to a larger number

Correct.
And if that happens, then the density of deer ticks on white-footed mice (= the % of mice that host ticks) could stay the same, because the tick population is growing with the availability of additional hosts.

If that's NOT true—i.e., if the tick population is constant—then adding more of the non-mouse species will spread out the population of ticks, so that the % of infected mice goes down. That in turn should decrease the frequency with which humans get infected.
User avatar
srach
Joined: 07 Aug 2022
Last visit: 12 Feb 2023
Posts: 9
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 3
Posts: 9
Kudos: 2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
scthakur
This is a cause-effect question. For the same effect, if there is an alternate cause, then this will help evaluate the argument.

The conclusion of the argument says that people contracting Lymn desease would decline by increasing number of other species as this would ensure decline in infected deer ticks.

But, if there deer ticks get infection from infected deers then people contracting Lymn desease may not decline.

Hence, D should be the answer.

It is stated in the passage that "Generally deer ticks pick up the bacterium while in the larval stage". So, whether the ticks pick up the infection as adults is irrelevant.
User avatar
Raman109
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Last visit: 28 Jul 2025
Posts: 805
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 33
Posts: 805
Kudos: 170
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Let's understand the argument -
Lyme disease is caused by a bacterium transmitted to humans by deer ticks. - Fact
Generally deer ticks pick up the bacterium while in the larval stage from feeding on infected whitefooted mice. Fact. But "generally" here is important because it seems the GMAT has created an option out of it, and it is a big trap. English meaning of "generally" is "in most cases." It doesn't mean "all." So, maybe 80% of the time, they pick up the bacterium while in the larval stage and 20% in other stages. GMAT doesn't waste a single word, so read every word carefully.
However, certain other species on which the larvae feed do not harbor the bacterium. Contrast and Fact
Therefore, if the population of these other species were increased, the number of ticks acquiring the bacterium and hence the number of people contracting Lyme disease—would likely decline. - Conclusion. This is interesting. If we don't understand it well, we are bound to make mistakes.

Let's break the conclusion as it's a cause-effect relationship.
Cause - the population of these other species was increased.
Effect - the number of ticks acquiring the bacterium and hence the number of people contracting Lyme disease—would likely decline. In other words, it means "Few deer ticks acquire the bacterium." (that essentially means less transmission to humans)

So its X causes Y.
What is an assumption in the causal arguments?
One of the assumptions for the causal argument is that there is no other cause. Which means X has to be the cause for Y to happen. In this argument, the Y is not straightforward, and that's the problem.

So, let's understand what Y is and what Y is not.

The effect Y is "Few deer ticks acquire the bacterium." What does it mean? It means if today 100 deer ticks feed on white mice, then with more "other species," say 25 deer ticks will feed on white-footed mice. Right? Yes. Why? Because the number feeding on white-footed mice has to reduce. (NOT INCREASE)
The argument does not say that the deer ticks (DT) population will increase. Against that, the argument is saying "fewer" DT will feed on white-footed mice.

So, what Y is not - If we give more food to DT - and their population explodes - this is not what we want. This is not Y.
What Y is - If we give more food to DT - earlier 100 DT and now 25 DT will feed on white-footed mice. If this happens, only then will the transmission to humans be reduced. Right? Yes. This is what Y is. Are you with me so far? If the answer is Yes, proceed else, read again. Otherwise, it'll confuse you.

Okay, if you are good now, let's move to the next step
So, if we translate the assumption into our argument's language, we will assume that "the population of deer ticks does not depend on the population of other species." Ok? Let's fill our assumption into the argument and see.

More other species (X) - the population of deer ticks does not depend on the population of other species (assumption) - Few deer ticks acquire the bacterium (Y).

Let me explain one last time before we proceed.
If the DT population depends on the population of other species, then the moment we increase the food supply, the DT population will explode. And if the population explodes, the spread to humans may increase or stay the same but not decline.
But if the DT population doesn't depend on the population of other species, then the moment we increase the food supply, out of the same 100 DTs, more, say 75, will feed on other species (uninfected) and 25 on white-footed mice (infected) - It'll in turn reduce the spread to humans.

If you have understood and survived so far, congratulations! Let's move to the next step.

How do we create evaluation questions? We create evaluation questions along the lines of assumptions. That's why you may have heard some experts saying try Yes and no. So, it's the same as adding the assumption (will strengthen) and removing the assumption (weaken) the conclusion.

So, based on our assumption that "the population of deer ticks does not depend on the population of other species," what will be the evaluation question we ask? We ask, "Does the population of deer ticks limited (depends on those limited resources for survival or growth) by the population of other species?"
If the answer is Yes, that means the moment we offer more resources (we remove the limitation), the population will explode, and we'll not achieve our goal.
If we say No, that means the moment we offer more resources (we remove the limitation), more of the existing DTs will feed on the other resources (uninfected), and as fewer DTs feed on the infected white-footed mice, less transmission to humans.

Option elimination will be a cakewalk if you have survived so far. Let's do it.

A. Whether populations of the other species on which deer tick larvae feed are found only in areas also inhabited by white-footed mice. - it does not matter. This is not in line with our assumption. But if it doesn't give peace to you. Let's do Yes/No to check
Yes, other species are only found in the areas inhabited by white-footed mice. Then may we need only to add more "other species" here as these are problem-maker areas and not other areas.
No, other species are not just found in the areas inhabited by white-footed mice - then we may need to spread the "other species" over a wider area.

This is not our assumption that we can create an evaluate question, but it can certainly answer where to introduce other species." Location is not our scope. So it is out of scope.

B. Whether the size of the deer tick population is currently limited by the availability of animals for ticks' larval stage to feed on - ok.

C. Whether the infected deer tick population could be controlled by increasing the number of animals that prey on white-footed mice. - Alternate plan. Moreover, Our problem is not the DT population. Our problem is that there are more DTs that feed on white-infected mice. This is a great distortion if we don't read properly.

D. Whether deer ticks that were not infected as larvae can become infected as adults by feeding on deer on which infected deer ticks have fed. - Remember "generally" we discussed above. So, from the argument, we already know that there can be other stages (and not just the larval stage) for the DT to get infected. This option does not tell us anything new if we are reading correctly. But if we don't read properly, this is a perfect trap.

E. Whether the other species on which deer tick larvae feed harbor any other bacteria that ticks transmit to humans. It's out of scope, please. We have enough to deal with from what is within the scope of the argument.
User avatar
ali.prasla
Joined: 05 May 2024
Last visit: 11 May 2024
Posts: 6
Location: United States (CT)
Schools: Kellogg '26
GPA: 3.5
Schools: Kellogg '26
Posts: 6
Kudos: 0
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The argument basically says:
  • Deer ticks usually get the Lyme disease bacteria as larvae by feeding on infected mice.
  • But some other animals that the larvae feed on don't carry the bacteria.
  • So if there were more of these other animals around, fewer ticks would get infected, and fewer people would get Lyme disease.
To evaluate this argument, we need to know if the ticks would actually feed on these other animals if given the chance. That's the key assumption.

(A) is irrelevant - doesn't matter if the other animals only live near the mice.

(B) looks good! It says there's already plenty of food for the ticks. So more food won't mean more ticks overall. Instead, any larvae eating the uninfected animals will reduce the number of infected ticks, strengthening the argument.

(C) is out of scope - the argument isn't about controlling the tick population in general.

(D) doesn't matter. The argument is based on the premise that ticks usually get infected as larvae. Other infection methods are beside the point.

(E) is also irrelevant. We don't care about other bacteria, just Lyme disease.

So (B) is the best answer. It's the only one that helps us evaluate the key assumption about larval feeding behavior.
User avatar
boybread5
Joined: 29 Dec 2016
Last visit: 17 Nov 2025
Posts: 24
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 19
Location: United States (CA)
GMAT Focus 1: 625 Q86 V80 DI77
GMAT Focus 2: 665 Q81 V89 DI79
GMAT Focus 3: 635 Q83 V78 DI83
GMAT Focus 4: 755 Q88 V90 DI85
GPA: 3.92
Products:
GMAT Focus 4: 755 Q88 V90 DI85
Posts: 24
Kudos: 19
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I just wanted to comment on this problem for personal accountability. I'd been doing a solid job with practice streaks on CR until this problem and I got a little lazy, losing sight of the argument.

Conclusion: If the population of these other species ('other species' refers to those species on which the larvae deer ticks pick up that do not harbor the Lyme disease bacterium), were increased, the number of ticks acquiring the bacterium and hence the number of people contracting Lyme disease—would likely decline.

Premise #1 / Background: Lyme disease is caused by a bacterium transmitted to humans by deer ticks.
Premise #2: Generally deer ticks pick up the bacterium while in the larval stage from feeding on infected whitefooted mice.

Not trying to overly anticipate gaps here, but instinctively two assumptions came to my mind when I was reading this problem. 1) Ticks have no preference for Lyme bacterium over other species (i.e., equal likelihood of selecting one of the species). 2) Supply of ticks does not grow commensurate with species increase.

Since this question is an 'Evaluate the Argument,' we are looking for a positive and counter-positive that would strengthen and weaken the argument.

Since I originally answered D and not B, going to go from E to A here.

E. Whether the other species on which deer tick larvae feed harbor any other bacteria that ticks transmits to humans. Whether the answer is 'Yes' or 'No,' the argument pertains to that bacterium related to Lyme disease. So, 'Yes' or 'No' would not strengthen or weaken the argument.
D. Whether deer ticks that were not infected as larvae can become infected as adults by feeding on deer on which infected deer ticks have fed. I answered this as correct originally and was thinking if yes, then the larvae could still feed on adult ticks. Looking at this case now, if other species increases, then based on the information presented so far, there's still nothing on this answer to cause us to believe that there won't be fewer deers infected with the bacterium. I think I then went down a rabbit hole that "well maybe deer ticks could then feed on infected deers" which would offset the decrease in infected ticks.

Where I think I went wrong here is this is a super complicated line of thinking and I should have already caught myself on this analysis.

I saw someone from Manhattan GMAT say D is wrong because it contradicts the Premise. It really doesn't. The premise says "Generally deer ticks pick up the bacterium." The 'generally' though would make my argument above even more unlikely.

C. Whether the infected deer tick population could be controlled by increasing the number of animals that prey on white footed mice. Out of scope of the argument as the question at hand is assessing whether increasing the other species will impact the number of infected ticks. So, C would be looking at the wrong factor.

B. Whether the size of the deer tick population is currently limited by the availability of animals for ticks ‘s larval stage to feed on. If Yes, then if there were more species, there would be more deer ticks and still likely an equal number of ticks infected. If no, then argument would be further strengthened.

A. Whether populations of the other species on which deer tick larvae feed are found only in areas also inhabited by white footed mice. If it's yes or no, this plan would still be able to work if other species are or aren't in areas inhabited by white footed mice.
   1   2   3 
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
189 posts