Oak trees have more leaves than elm trees. However, since maple trees

Question

Oak trees have more leaves than elm trees. However, since maple trees have more leaves than beech trees, it follows that oak trees have more leaves than beech trees.

Which of the following statements, if added as an additional premise, fail to support the conclusion?

A Oak trees and maple trees have the same amount of leaves.
B Elm trees and maple trees have the same amount of leaves.
C Elm trees have more leaves than maple trees.
D Elm trees have more leaves than beech trees.
E Maple trees have more leaves than oak trees.

This is a  CR Butler Question

Check the links to other Butler Projects:

Data Sufficiency Butler  
  Problem Solving Butler  
  Reading Comprehension Butler  
  Data Insights Butler

ManifestDreamMBA · Answer

Premise: O>E
Premise: M>B
Conclusion: O>B

Looking for weakener

A Oak trees and maple trees have the same amount of leaves.  O = M, supports as O=M>B. Out 
B Elm trees and maple trees have the same amount of leaves.  E=M, supports as O>E=M>B. Out 
C Elm trees have more leaves than maple trees.  E>M, supports as O>E>M>B. Out 
D Elm trees have more leaves than beech trees.  E>B, supports as O>E>B. Out 
E Maple trees have more leaves than oak trees. M>O.  This doesn't give relation b/w O and B. It can be O=B or O>B or O<B.

NextstopISB · Answer

Premises: 
1. O > E 
2. M > B 
Conclusion: O > B

Looking for a weakener:

(A) Oak trees and maple trees have the same number of leaves (O = M). 
 - This supports the argument since O = M > B. Eliminate.

(B) Elm trees and maple trees have the same number of leaves (E = M). 
 - This supports the argument since O > E = M > B. Eliminate.

(C) Elm trees have more leaves than maple trees (E > M). 
 - This still supports the argument since O > E > M > B. Eliminate.

(D) Elm trees have more leaves than beech trees (E > B). 
 - This supports the argument since O > E > B. Eliminate.

(E) Maple trees have more leaves than oak trees (M > O). 
 - This contradicts the premise O > E and disrupts the relation between O and B, 
 making it unclear whether O > B. Correct answer.

Whoisdmx15 · Answer

Which of the following statements, if added as an additional premise, fail to support the conclusion?

Given: O>E and M>B

A Oak trees and maple trees have the same amount of leaves. This gives O=M>B Hence supports

B Elm trees and maple trees have the same amount of leaves. This gives O>E=M>B Hence supports

C Elm trees have more leaves than maple trees. This gives O>E>M>B Hence supports

D Elm trees have more leaves than beech trees. This gives O>E>B Hence supports

E Maple trees have more leaves than oak trees. This only gives M>O. This can lead to M>B>O>E or M>O>B>E As there is no certainty in conclusion, hence does not support
 IMO Ans E

Spongeman · Answer

Original Argument: 
The argument essentially states that since oak trees have more leaves than elm trees and maple trees have more leaves than beech trees, it logically follows that oak trees must also have more leaves than beech trees.

Logic Chain: 
 1. Oak trees > Elm trees
 2. Maple trees > Beech trees
 3. Conclusion inferred: Oak trees > Beech trees

The argument implicitly assumes a sort of hierarchical relationship among these trees based on their leaf counts, leading to the conclusion that oaks have more leaves than beech trees.

A. Oak trees and maple trees have the same amount of leaves. 
This premise does not disrupt the conclusion; it actually aligns with the initial comparison that oak trees have more leaves than beech trees if we know maple trees already have more leaves than beech trees.

B. Elm trees and maple trees have the same amount of leaves. 
Like A, this statement aligns with the given information and supports the conclusion by strengthening the position of maple trees relative to elm trees, and indirectly supporting that oak trees (which have more leaves than elms) also have more leaves than beech trees.

C. Elm trees have more leaves than maple trees. 
This statement contradicts the flow of the original argument because if elm trees have more leaves than maple trees, and maple trees have more leaves than beech trees, it implies that elm trees could have potentially more or the same amount of leaves as oak trees, thus breaking the logic that leads to the conclusion about oak and beech trees.

D. Elm trees have more leaves than beech trees. 
This supports the conclusion by showing a chain from oak to elm to beech in terms of leaf quantity, reinforcing the idea that oaks have more leaves than beech trees.

Analyzing Option E: 
 • Option E: Maple trees have more leaves than oak trees.

This statement introduces a new piece of information that disrupts the hierarchical leaf count used to derive the conclusion. If maple trees, which are already established as having more leaves than beech trees, also have more leaves than oak trees, it contradicts the direct comparison that positions oak trees at a higher leaf count than beech trees. Here’s how:
 • Given:
 • Maple > Beech
 • E states: Maple > Oak
 • If Maple > Oak and Maple > Beech, it doesn’t necessarily imply that Oak > Beech anymore. In fact, it raises the possibility that Beech could have more leaves than Oak or equal, which directly conflicts with the conclusion being made.

Therefore, option E does not just fail to support the conclusion but actively contradicts it by suggesting an alternate hierarchy where oak trees may not have more leaves than beech trees, contrary to the conclusion’s claim. Thus, E is the correct answer as it undermines the argument’s conclusion about oak and beech trees’ leaf count comparison.

Su1206 · Answer

This is pretty straight forward.

Premise: 
O>E
M>B
 Conclusion 
O>B

Assumptions that are apparent:
 O>M or M is not greater than O

Target: 
Find a piece of evidence that weakens the assumption.

Option E directly does that. That is the correct answer.

Bunuel · Answer

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

This is a weaken the argument question because it asks for the answer choice that does not support the argument.

Identify the argument. Because oak trees have more leaves than elm trees, and maple trees have more leaves than beech trees, oak trees must have more leaves than beech trees.

Try and anticipate what the answer will be. In this instance, if beech trees have more leaves than oak trees the argument falls apart.

Eliminate answer choices that support the argument. Could beech trees have more leaves than oak trees if they have less leaves than elm trees? NO. Could beech trees have more leaves than oak trees if maple trees have more leaves than oak trees? YES. We need to find the choice that makes this a possibility. 
 The answer is  E because if maple trees have more leaves than oak trees we cannot know that oak trees have more leaves than beech trees.

Oak trees have more leaves than elm trees. However, since maple trees

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Oak trees have more leaves than elm trees. However, since maple trees

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards