Organic farmers are looking for non-chemical methods to rid their crop

Question

Competition Mode Question

Organic farmers are looking for non-chemical methods to rid their crops of pests. Giving crops a slight electric shock has no ill effect on crops but rids them of caterpillars. This method should be employed by organic farmers all over the country.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the view that it would not be advisable to try to eradicate agricultural pests with the method mentioned above?

A. Most species of caterpillar are subject to some natural predators.
B. Many agricultural pests do not go through a caterpillar stage.
C. This method also kills insects that are agriculturally beneficial.
D. Since caterpillars of different species appear at different times of the year, several shocks would be necessary.
E. No large-scale production facilities exist today for the product that electrifies crops.

unraveled · Answer

Organic farmers are looking for non-chemical methods to rid their crops of pests. Giving crops a slight electric shock has no ill effect on crops but rids them of caterpillars. This method should be employed by organic farmers all over the country.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the view that it would not be advisable to try to eradicate agricultural pests with the method mentioned above?

A. Most species of caterpillar are subject to some natural predators.
B. Many agricultural pests do not go through a caterpillar stage.
C. This method also kills insects that are agriculturally beneficial.
D. Since caterpillars of different species appear at different times of the year, several shocks would be necessary.
E. No large-scale production facilities exist today for the product that electrifies crops.

Only option C supports the view in best possible manner. All other choices are irrelevant.

IMO Answer C.

LalitaSiri · Answer

Organic farmers are looking for non-chemical methods to rid their crops of pests. Giving crops a slight electric shock has no ill effect on crops but rids them of caterpillars. This method should be employed by organic farmers all over the country.

Conclusion: Organic farmers should use electric shock method to get rid of their crop of pests.

Find statement that weaken the mentioned method above.
Pre-thinking: The electric shock not only hurt the caterpillars but hurt the crop too.

Choice C match our pre-thinking, "This method also kills insects that are agriculturally beneficial". If it is the case, the crop might be effect from those killing insects too. Thus, the organic farmers should not employ the mentioned method.

So Choice C is the correct answer choice

joohwangie · Answer

Organic farmers are looking for non-chemical methods to rid their crops of pests. Giving crops a slight electric shock has no ill effect on crops but rids them of caterpillars. This method should be employed by organic farmers all over the country.

Want to get rid of pests, use electric shock to get rids of caterpillars.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the view that it would not be advisable to try to eradicate agricultural pests with the method mentioned above?

A. Most species of caterpillar are subject to some natural predators.  -- out of scope/doesn't matter 
B. Many agricultural pests do not go through a caterpillar stage.  -- the electric shock can get rid of caterpillar. if pests are not caterpillar, no use. Therefore correct answer. 
C. This method also kills insects that are agriculturally beneficial.  -- could be possible, but does not align with what our objective which is get rid of pests 
D. Since caterpillars of different species appear at different times of the year, several shocks would be necessary.  -- we still don't know whether or not it get rid of pests 
E. No large-scale production facilities exist today for the product that electrifies crops.  -- out of scope

eakabuah · Answer

The best option has to be C  in my view.

If the method proposed by the argument also kills some insects that are agriculturally beneficial, then it defeats the purpose of organic farming. This also weakens the conclusion by the author that the method of getting rid of pests by giving plants electric shocks considering it is based on the assumption that giving electric shocks does not have any adverse effects on other useful organisms to organic farming other than the caterpillar pests.

In option A it is stated that many caterpillar species are subject to some natural predators. While this might be true, it does not weaken the recommendation to apply electric shocks to plants to get rid of caterpillars. In addition, there might be some regions that do not have the natural predators for caterpillars, hence the use of electric shocks might be applicable there.

In B, it is stated that many pest do not go through the caterpillar stage. This does not mean some pests do not go through the caterpillar stage in which case the proposed method would be useful in dealing with such pests. Hence B is not the best weakener out of the lot.

D does not weaken the argument. As long as each electric shock will get rid of the pests per season, the approach proposed by the argument is useful.

In E, even if no large scale facility exists today to produce what is needed to electrify the crops, such facilities can be provided tomorrow or in future and hence still make the recommendation in the argument valid.

exc4libur · Answer

ARGUMENT
  farmers should use electric shocks to get rid of pests;
  because such shocks have no ill effect on crops;
  also, because it is a non-chemical method;
  shocks that have effect on pests, but not on crops, must be beneficial overall.

WEAKEN
A. "some preds…" doesn't weaken, irev;
B. "many pests don't go through a caterpillar stage", what about those that do? irev;
D. "several shocks would be necessary" we don't know how much shocks the crops could withstand, irev;
E. "no facilities exist today for the product" but it could exist tomorrow… irev;

Answer (C): shocks kills stuff that is beneficial to crops, this weakens the premise.

11manish11 · Answer

Option C

As we need to find a something that links damaging effect on plant due to electrification and option C clearly says so.

Posted from my mobile device

Bunuel · Answer

Official Explanation

Correct Answer: C

If electrifying crops kills beneficial pests, it may do as much or more harm than good.

VerbalBot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

Organic farmers are looking for non-chemical methods to rid their crop

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

Organic farmers are looking for non-chemical methods to rid their crop

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