Nitrobacter, a bacteria living in the roots of bean plants or other

Hi priyankakosaraju,

it isn't really a problem that there could be other fertilizers because we don't have any information about them. I would say that as long as it isn't mentioned that there usage changes we can assume that their usage is constant. So if their usage remains the same and the usage of the nitrogen-based fertilizer shrinks we still would have a decrease in fertilizer usage.

Does that help?

I am confused between C and E.
E gives better reasoning and works with negation rule but somehow C is also good enough to be a candidate.
Can someone tell me why to rule out C

Can you tell for sure that naturally occurring strains of wheat or other grasses that have Nitrobacter living in their roots will produce Nitrogen ?

You will again need the assumption that nictrobcater in wheat will produce Nitrogen.

What if the other contents living in the roots restrict the production of nitrogen. To me C is an alternative way to get nictrobacter in the roots of Wheat but not necessarily gurantees the production of nitrogen.

We need to argue whether nictobactor presence in wheat(non legumes) will reduce use of fertilizers or not

C says there Are no naturally occurring strains in wheat- we are not concerned with this whether they have it or not from previously

We just need to know whether nictobactor presence will help to reduce fertilizers .C doesn't address this concern

Give kudos if it helps

Posted from my mobile device

Think of it this way. If X is an artificial fertilizer which is primarily used to supply nitrogen (artificially) and other nutrients (such as Calcium etc.) which are not really needed to be absorbed artificially and are rather available in the soil naturally. Thus, upon negating the Option B, even if there are other such fertilizers (such as calcium used in my example), they don't create any reliability on fertilizers or their increased use as they are still available in the soil naturally. Hence, we cannot break the conclusion for sure.

Also take note of the word "essential" used exclusively for nitrogen. That also creates one more possibility that the other nutrients supplied by fertilizer may not be as essential in producing good quality wheat crops (maybe their absence does not have a significant impact).

In assumption questions, we must look for options that break the conclusion totally if they are negated. Even if there is the slightest doubt about the conclusion not being broken, the option choice should not be selected.

A Biotechnology should be directed toward producing plants that do not require artificial fertilizer.
We are not ina position to determine whether biotechnology is already inclined and no requirement further direction

B Fixed nitrogen is currently the only soil nutrient that must be supplied by artificial fertilizer for growing wheat crops.
We are also not given enough information about the same it could be that natural fertilizers are also required

C There are no naturally occurring strains of wheat or other grasses that have Nitrobacter living in their roots.
We are not in aposition to comment thesame

D Legumes are currently the only crops that produce their own supply of fixed nitrogen.
Same argument as C

E Nitrobacter living in the roots of wheat would produce fixed nitrogen.
This is a valid point otherwise it is pointless as of developing the same