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.
Nov 2007:30 AM PST
-08:30 AM PST
Learn what truly sets the UC Riverside MBA apart and how it helps in your professional growth
Nov 2211:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Do RC/MSR passages scare you? e-GMAT is conducting a masterclass to help you learn – Learn effective reading strategies Tackle difficult RC & MSR with confidence Excel in timed test environment- Nov 23
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Nov 2510:00 AM EST
-11:00 AM EST
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors.
17 Oct 2024, 09:27
Kudos
Bookmarks
DmitryFarber KarishmaB MartyMurray
Narrowing down to (C) and (D) was easy. (C) and (D) looked equally probable, and i am not sure why my reasoning doesn't hold up for (D). Please help me out!!
Let say: Currently there are 1000 other hosts and millions of tick larvae.
Conclusion: If the population of these species increased, number of ticks acquiring the bacterium would likely decline.
Now: If i say that each host can support a-million larvae, wouldn't it strengthen the argument? Wouldn't it make more likely that Ticks acquiring the bacterium will decline?
But yes, questions remains that how many are 'MANY''. It can be million or can be in single digit.
Narrowing down to (C) and (D) was easy. (C) and (D) looked equally probable, and i am not sure why my reasoning doesn't hold up for (D). Please help me out!!
Let say: Currently there are 1000 other hosts and millions of tick larvae.
Conclusion: If the population of these species increased, number of ticks acquiring the bacterium would likely decline.
Now: If i say that each host can support a-million larvae, wouldn't it strengthen the argument? Wouldn't it make more likely that Ticks acquiring the bacterium will decline?
But yes, questions remains that how many are 'MANY''. It can be million or can be in single digit.
17 Oct 2024, 11:21
Kudos
Bookmarks
Contropositive
Let's take a close look at (D).
(D) A single host animal can be the source of bacteria for many tick larvae.
Notice that (D) is about a host animal being "the source of bacteria" for tick larvae.
The fact that one animal can pass bacteria to "many tick larvae" certainly does not strengthen the case for the conclusion that "the number of ticks acquiring the bacterium would likely decline."
Now, I guess we could take the choice to mean that an animal, whether infected or not, can be the host to many larvae. All the same, even that information does not strengthen the argument since it means that both infected animals and uninfected animals could host many larvae, and it doesn't give us any reason to believe that larvae will not continue to pick up bacteria from infected hosts.
So, we can eliminate (D).
18 Oct 2024, 02:54
Kudos
Bookmarks
Contropositive
Take numbers.
Scenario 1:
Say there are a million hosts (500k infected, 500k not) and a million larvae.
Assuming a larva feeds on 1 host, how many larvae will get infected? 500k. Chance of getting infected = 1/2.
Say the population of uninfected hosts increases to 1.5 million. Now chance of larva getting infected = 1/4.
So only 250k larvae get infected.
Scenario 2:
Say there are a 1000 hosts (500 infected, 500 not) and a million larvae.
So 1000 larvae feed on 1 host. How many larvae will get infected? 500k. Chance of getting infected = 1/2.
Say the population of uninfected hosts increases to 2000. Now chance of larva getting infected = 1/4.
So only 250k larvae get infected.
Whether I have many hosts or few hosts, nothing changes in the decrease in the infection rate.
After all, the increase in population depends on how many hosts we have originally. It will be proportional to that.
