Micro-wear patterns found on the teeth of long-extinct specimens o

GMATNinja GMATNinjaTwo Sajjad1994 KarishmaB egmat

I have a slight doubt in Ques 8 - The passage is primarily concerned with

(A) comparing two research methods for determining a species' dietary habits
(B) describing and evaluating conjectures about a species' diet
(C) contrasting several explanations for a species' dietary habits
(D) discussing a new approach and advocating its use in particular situations
(E) arguing that a particular research methodology does not contribute useful data

RC00613-09.02

I want to check on reason why option E is wrong. Since the question asks that what is the primary purpose of passage i.e. why was the passage written and it is primarily to describe and evaluate diets for australopithecines. However, the main conclusion of passage is E. Is my understanding correct? Are there some other reasons for option E to be incorrect?

Question #8 is briefly explained here in the post by GMAT ninja. Follow the below link

https://gmatclub.com/forum/micro-wear-p ... l#p2637467

Thank you!

8. The passage is primarily concerned with

(A) comparing two research methods for determining a species' dietary habits
(B) describing and evaluating conjectures about a species' diet
(C) contrasting several explanations for a species' dietary habits
(D) discussing a new approach and advocating its use in particular situations
(E) arguing that a particular research methodology does not contribute useful data

Note what the passage says:
...research on the diets of contemporary primates suggests that micro-wear studies may have limited utility in determining the foods that are actually eaten...
Thus, Walker’s description of possible australopithecine diets may need to be expanded to include a much more diverse diet....

The author talks about limited utility and that the description may need to be expanded. He doesn't say that Walker's description is not useful. He says that utility may be limited. Hence (E) is not correct.
But he does describe the various conjectures and evaluates them (and concludes that Walker's description needs to be expanded) hence (B) is correct.

Para1
Walker’s hypothesis that
austra has micro-wear pattern on teeth like chimpanzee
-->chimpanzee are fruiter
-->austral are fruiter too

Para2
refute Walker’s in that micro-wear studies maybe too limited
1. insect-eating animal baboon --> also produce micro-wear pattern
-->there’re more animals produce micro-wear pattern but not fruiter
--> austral, which has micro-wear pattern, somewhat may not be fruiter and be insect-eating

2. if austra, which has micro-wear pattern on teeth, is omnivore
--> there will be lots of animals has micro-wear pattern on teeth
just logic in reverse way:
if austral not omnivore that only eat fruit as Walker suppose
--> there won’t be lots of animals like chimpanzee or orangutan has micro-wear pattern on teeth
--> thus prove the wrong view of Walker’s hypothesis and support the refutation that austral can
be omnivore not only eat fruit, as the conclusion given in the end of the paragraph




1. According to the passage, Walker and Szalay disagree on which of the following points?

(A) The structure and composition of australopithecine teeth

Neither two hypothese has mentioned these, Walker only talks about micro-wear pattern on teeth so its not related to structure of the teeth while Szalay says the bone-crunching behavior is too not related to the structure and composition of austra’s teeth

(B) The kinds of conclusions that can be drawn from the micro-wear patterns on australopithecine teeth

Only we could draw conclusion of micro-wear pattern teeth in Walker’s hypothesis, nowhere in Szalay’s could we find traces about this, thus nowhere to compare whether its their disagreement

(C) The idea that fruit was a part of the australopithecine diet

Same as (B)

(D) The extent to which seed cracking and bone crunching produce similar micro-wear patterns on teeth

Opposite to (B) and (C), this statement could only be found at Szalay’s hypothesis

(E) The function of the heavy enamel on australopithecine teeth

Walker: micro-wear pattern on teeth of austra --->evidence of their diet

Szalay: in fact, there’s no cause and effect concerning his hypothesis, its parallel among them
1. austra bone-crunching ---> lead to micro-wear pattern on austra’s tooth
2. its austra’s bone crunching ---> lead to the heavy enamel of austra’s teeth

here you could see clearly that both two agree on micro-wear pattern on teeth of austral, the dissension only appear in Szalay’s second view, so heavy enamel of austra’s teeth is the point where two disagree upon




2. The passage suggests that Walker’s research indicated which of the following about australopithecine teeth?

(A) They had micro-wear characteristics indicating that fruit constituted only a small part of their diet.

In Walker’s theory since there’s micro-wear pattern in austra’s teeth, it then concludes that austra’s only diet is fruit, thus statement in (A) is wrong

(B) They lacked micro-wear characteristics associated with seed eating and bone crunching.

Walker’s hypothesis propose that micro-wear pattern of austra’s teeth only associated with fruit eating, thus (B) correct

(C) They had micro-wear characteristics that differed in certain ways from the micro-wear patterns of chimpanzees and orangutans.

Walker’s hypothesis suggest the micro-wear pattern of austral is same as chimpanzee and organtun, wrong

(D) They had micro-wear characteristics suggesting that the diet of australopithecines varied from one region to another.

The passage hasn’t mentioned anything about the diet of austra’s varied from one region to another

(E) They lacked the micro-wear characteristics distinctive of modern frugivores.

Wrong, Walker’s theory clearly states that austra’s teeth owns the micro-wear characteristics in frugivores such as chimpanzee or organtun




3. The passage suggests that which of the following would be true of studies of tooth micro-wear patterns conducted on modern baboons?


See second refutation: insect eating, which can cause distinct micro-wear patterns, would not cause much tooth abrasion in modern baboons, who eat only soft-bodied insects rather than hard-bodied insects.

(A) They would inaccurately suggest that some baboons eat more soft-bodied than hard-bodied insects.

No, the passage accurately suggest these

(B) They would suggest that insects constitute the largest part of some baboons’ diets.

According to passage, insects are the only, not the “largest part of baboons’ diets

(C) They would reveal that there are no significant differences in tooth micro-wear patterns among baboon populations.

The population variation in austra’s tooth micro-wear patterns only appear in the first refutation rather than the first one

(D) They would inadequately reflect the extent to which some baboons consume certain types of insects.

Correct, the statement clearly says that baboons eat only soft-bodied insects rather than hard-bodied insects

(E) They would indicate that baboons in certain regions eat only soft-bodied insects, whereas baboons in other regions eat hard-bodied insects.

Baboon only eats soft-bodied insects, this is the clear statement in the first refutation, thus this choice is wrong



4. The passage suggests which of the following about the micro-wear patterns found on the teeth of omnivorous primates?

In addition, the diets of current omnivorous primates vary considerably depending on the environments that different groups within a primate species inhabit; if australopithecines were omnivores too, we might expect to find considerable population variation in their tooth micro-wear patterns.

(A) The patterns provide information about what kinds of foods are not eaten by the particular species of primate, but not about the foods actually eaten.

The micro-wave pattern gives no implication about what foods are or aren’t eaten by particular species

(B) The patterns of various primate species living in the same environment resemble one another.

Nowhere mention the link between micro-wave patterns of species and environment

(C) The patterns may not provide information about the extent to which a particular species’ diet includes seeds.

From the passage, the wider variety of patterns is the effect to the cause of if austras were omnivore, thus whether or not the pattern provide information anout particular species’s diet we cannot for sure

(D) The patterns provide more information about these primates’ diet than do the tooth micro-wear patterns of primates who are frugivores.

Same as (C), these are nowhere to trace

(E) The patterns may differ among groups within a species depending on the environment within which a particular group lives.

Correct, clearly correspond to the passage with regard to second refutation convey




5. It can be inferred from the passage that if studies of tooth micro-wear patterns were conducted on modern baboons, which of the following would most likely be true of the results obtained?

For example, insect eating, which can cause distinct micro-wear patterns, would not cause much tooth abrasion in modern baboons, who eat only soft-bodied insects rather than hard-bodied insects.

(A) There would be enough abrasion to allow a determination of whether baboons are frugivorous or insectivorous.

the question want to know how could we infer from the micro-wave pattern on baboon which doesn’t limit to eating habit, while choice (A) subjectively conclude that abrasion(pattern) could determine the eating habits of baboon, thus narrow down the whole scope being ask

(B) The results would suggest that insects constitute the largest part of the baboons’ diet.

Its insects are the “only” rather than “largest part” of baboon’s diet

(C) The results would reveal that there are no significant differences in tooth micro-wear patterns from one regional baboon population to another.

Region doesn’t discuss in the whole passage

(D) The results would provide an accurate indication of the absence of some kinds of insects from the baboons’ diet.

Correct, see “tooth abrasion in modern baboons, who eat only soft-bodied insects rather than hard-bodied insects…..”, thus it indeed have some kind s of insects missing out in baboon’s diet

(E) The results would be unlikely to provide any indication of what inferences about the australopithecine diet can or cannot be drawn from micro-wear studies.

the second refutation indeed give us a reason why Walker’s hypothesis concerning austra’s diet is wrong, thus the result of the study on micro-wave pattern of baboon could offer inference about austra’s diet or micro-wave pattern in that austra’s diet doesn’t only limit to fruits




6. It can be inferred from the passage that Walker’s conclusion about the australopithecine diet would be called into question under which of the following circumstances?


(A) The tooth enamel of australopithecines is found to be much heavier than that of modern frugivorous primates.

See sentences in para1 “He also disputes Szalay’s suggestion that the heavy enamel of australopithecine teeth is an adaptation to bone crunching, since both seed cracking and bone crunching produce distinctive micro-wear characteristics on teeth…..”, Walker deny the hypothesis of the heavy enamel of austras, but his conclusion doesn’t call into question it’s much heavier than frugivorous primates, there’s no comparing betwwen these two primates

(B) The micro-wear patterns of australopithecine teeth from regions other than east Africa are analyzed.

Same as question5, though Walker study the primates in east Africa, other regions don’t ever discuss in the whole passage

(C) Orangutans are found to have a much broader diet than is currently recognized.

Correct, notice the end of the passage that concludes “possible australopithecine diets may need to be expanded to include a much more diverse diet…..”, and as orangutan is being regard as the same as austra to their similar micro-wear pattern in paragraph 1, thus it should have a wider range of diet than we know thought

(D) The environment of east Africa at the time australopithecines lived there is found to have been far more varied than is currently thought.

Nowhere to trace this

(E) The area in which the australopithecine specimens were found is discovered to have been very rich in soft-bodied insects during the period when australopithecines lived there.

We only know from sec refutation that baboon, which also has micro-wave pattern like austra, consume soft-bodied insects, however the area austral lived are rich in these insects is nowhere talks about in the passage




7. The author of the passage mentions the diets of baboons and other living primates most likely in order to

(A) provide evidence that refutes Walker’s conclusions about the foods making
up the diets of australopithecines

two examples mention in para2 can’t be defined as “evidence”, they’re just examples to illustrate why there’s doubt concerning Walker’s hypothesis

(B) suggest that studies of tooth micro-wear patterns are primarily useful for determining the diets of living primates

Only take tooth micro-wear patterns as a tool to study the diets of living primates, no subjectively determine whether these are useful or not

(C) suggest that australopithecines were probably omnivores rather than frugivores

No suggestion concern here, the author just want to use examples raised to verify the conclusion given

(D) illustrate some of the limitations of using tooth micro-wear patterns to draw definitive conclusions about a group’s diet

Correct, Walker’s hypothesis in para1 use patterns to conclude on the primate group’s diet, then in para2 two examples raise to show the limitation, the problem, concerning with this method of researching

(E) suggest that tooth micro-wear patterns are caused by persistent, as opposed to occasional, consumption of particular foods

How micro-wear patterns were formulated by certain foraging behavior doesn’t ever in the passage

Hello Sir GMATNinja and also tagging other legends @VeritasKarishma and AndrewN (Whoever can spare some time on this) -

I am confused with QN 1, Why C is wrong and E is correct?

Usually for disagree questions, I read the statement and decide whether there's a mismatch b/w both parties on an issue.

I eliminated E quickly because I thought Walker never went into the specifics of the function of the enamel.

Whereas in C it says "The idea that fruit was a part of the australopithecine diet"

Walker - He agrees that australopithecines were fruit eaters
Szalay - Enamel due to bone crunching, so not fruit eaters

So there's a agreement and disagreement, what am I missing? Is it because Walker thinks fruit formed the majority of the diet and Szalay did not discounted the possibility that fruit can be part of the diet with enamel evidence showing Bone/meat to also be part of the diet? Is this why this answer choice is wrong?

Even then, I am not convinced where Walker talked about the "Function" of enamel directly?

Thanks.

Hello, IN2MBB2PE. One note before I get to the question: VeritasKarishma is now KarishmaB, so you may want to update your tag rolodex if you would like to request her input. As for the question, I answered it incorrectly when I came across it last year. Once in a while, I find a clumsily written answer choice that I write off immediately, only to find later that that was the OA. In this question, I agree that the heavy enamel of australopithecine teeth is an adaptation to bone crunching from the passage is not synonymous with the function of the heavy enamel on australopithecine teeth in answer choice (E). If the two words adaptation and function are synonymous, then what am I to make of a sentence such as, His maneuver was an adaptation to the previous attack? (His maneuver was a function of the previous attack?) In biology, an adaptation is a reaction to some agent: The cells adapted negatively to the presence of intense radiation, and the workers soon developed cancer. Is the function of a healthy cell to ward off cancer, or would such a development be the result of a cell that was functioning in a normal way? And what about confounding variables? Perhaps australophithecines developed heavy tooth enamel and an enhanced ability to repair damaged teeth as an adaptation to bone crunching, but what, then, would be the difference in function between the enamel and the ability to repair damaged teeth? Perhaps you understand why I struggled with this question.

That said, I did not choose answer choice (C), and you touched on the reason yourself. Answer choice (C) indicates that Walker and Szalay would disagree on whether fruit was a part of the australopithecine diet. Just because Szalay believes that australopithecines crunched bones with their teeth does not mean that he or she argues that australopithecines ate bones (or the marrow from them) exclusively. That is too far of a stretch from the one line the passage gives us.

If you are curious, I felt that the phrasing of the key information in paragraph one was unclear. For reference:


Now, it seems clear to me that Walker is using evidence from tooth micro-wear patterns, but does this pairing of information necessarily exclude Jolly or even Szalay from also using such evidence to support their own hypotheses? I am not so sure. I think the passage could have better conveyed that these hypotheses were formed without taking micro-wear patterns into account. The overarching frame of the paragraph, from the first few words, lends itself to being interpreted as outlining a debate on the australopithecine diet based on these micro-wear patterns. I guess this is a lesson in learning to lean on the safest interpretation, rather than on something that could be true.

Enough of my ranting. At least my feelings about the question should be clear, and perhaps answer choice (C) is less appealing than it was to you before.

Thank you for thinking to ask.

- Andrew

I dont get 8no question in my official guide..(paper pack)

Can someone explain that why option E is incorrect why choice B is correct in question 8?

Check out this post and let us know if you have any further questions!

Hi Experts, GMATNinja KarishmaB
I did not catch the important info that I quoted above, and this is so ruinious that make me do 2 questions wrong
As Ninja claims "enamel is NOT micro-wear, and "heavy enamel" is NOT a micro-wear pattern"
but in the passage
"He also disputes Szalay’s suggestion that the heavy enamel of australopithecine teeth is an adaptation to bone crunching, since both seed cracking and bone crunching produce distinctive micro-wear characteristics on teeth."
W disputes arguement that heavy enamel is a sign of eating bone, BECAUSE both seed cracking and bone crunching produce distinctive micro-wear characteristics,
—>
Premise: distinctive micro-wear characteristics by both seed cracking and bone crunching
Conclusion: heavy enamel is NOT a sign of eating bone

I thought the message conveyed here is distinctive micro-wear characteristics = heavy enamel

Now I know that heavy enamel does not equal to micro-wear characteristics, as I did question 6 wrong as well regarding same point

--
It can be inferred from the passage that Walker’s conclusion about the australopithecine diet would be called into question under which of the following circumstances?

A. Chocie I pick: The tooth enamel of australopithecines is found to be much heavier than that of modern frugivorous primates.
C: OA: Orangutans are found to have a much broader diet than is currently recognized.
--
Because of the illusion that I get [heavy enamel = micro-wear pattern]
My reasoning is that W's conclusion that australopithecines were frugivores drives from evidence of similar micro-wear characteristics shared between australopithecines and chimpanzees and orangutans, which are commonly assumed to be frugivorous primates.(assumed means not neccessarily is)
but choice A tell us that tooth enamel of australopithecines is heavier than modern frugivorous primates (definitely are frugivores, instead of assumed frugivores), so the micro-wear characteristics difference between the australopithecines & definite frugivores can weak W's argument based on analogy between australopithecines and presumed frugivores
Now I can understand why choice C is correct, but still confused why choice A is wrong
Could you plz sheild more lights on how did you drive the insightful conclusion that "heavy enamel" is NOT a micro-wear pattern plz, and why Choice A in Q6 is wrong? many thx

Terry7

First, as you suggest, it's important to remember that "enamel" and "micro-wear patterns" are different things.

Now, the passage starts by telling us that "micro-wear patterns" can provide evidence about diet. Using this logic, Walker concludes that australopithecines were frugivores because their micro-wear patterns are similar to chimpanzees and orangutans.

Notice that Walker's conclusion does NOT depend at all on the enamel of australopithecines. Walker concludes that australopithecines are frugivores based solely on micro-wear patterns.

So the idea that australopithecenes might have heavier tooth enamel than modern frugivorous primates, as (A) says, is irrelevant. As long as australopithecene's micro-wear patterns are indistinguishable from those of modern frugivores (such as chimpanzees and orangutans), Walker's conclusion holds. And for that reason, we can eliminate (A).

I hope that helps!

Can anyone help with Q8, the primary purpose of the passage, in this set?

Briefly discussed here in the post in the link below

https://gmatclub.com/forum/micro-wear-p ... l#p1879062

Cheers.

Check out the explanation at this link, and let us know if that doesn't clear things up!

Thanks for the response!

Hi, ideally how long should you take to answer such a passage? As it is quite long and has 8 questions. So would 11 minutes be the right amount of time - 3 minutes to read the passage and 1 minute per question?

Hi

For the last question that is "primary purpose of the passage", why is option B correct and not option E ? I understand the fact that the author is talking about a species' diet for the most part. But he also pulls the example of baboon to show us that how the theory is not that useful and that it can lead to false conclusions.