GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 15 Nov 2018, 15:43

### 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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

## Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in November
PrevNext
SuMoTuWeThFrSa
28293031123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
2526272829301
Open Detailed Calendar
• ### Free GMAT Strategy Webinar

November 17, 2018

November 17, 2018

07:00 AM PST

09:00 AM PST

Nov. 17, 7 AM PST. Aiming to score 760+? Attend this FREE session to learn how to Define your GMAT Strategy, Create your Study Plan and Master the Core Skills to excel on the GMAT.
• ### GMATbuster's Weekly GMAT Quant Quiz # 9

November 17, 2018

November 17, 2018

09:00 AM PST

11:00 AM PST

Join the Quiz Saturday November 17th, 9 AM PST. The Quiz will last approximately 2 hours. Make sure you are on time or you will be at a disadvantage.

# Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Current Student
Joined: 14 Jun 2015
Posts: 90
Location: India
GMAT 1: 680 Q46 V37
GMAT 2: 750 Q50 V40
GPA: 3.5
WE: Information Technology (Telecommunications)
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Dec 2015, 21:19
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
sondenso wrote:
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage. Unfortunately, the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones. Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer. However,since consumer demand for grains, fruits, and vegetables grown without the use of pesticides continues to rise, the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread.

In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first supplies a context for the argument; the second is the argument's main conclusion.
(B) The first introduces a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second is a state of affairs that the argument denies will be part of that outcome.
(C) The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs againstthat prediction.
(D) The first provides a certain outcome that the agrument seeks to weigh against; the second is a consideration that support the main conclusion.
(E) The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion.

Responding to a pm:

What is the essence of the argument?
Genetically modified seeds are highly resistant to insects. But they are more expensive and need more fertilizer and water. So farmers won't save money by using them (prediction).
But people like them so their use will keep increasing (conclusion).

So what part is in bold? Let me underline it to show clearly...

Genetically modified seeds are highly resistant to insects. But they are more expensive and need more fertilizer and water. So farmers won't save money by using them (prediction).
But people like them so [i]their use will keep increasing (conclusion)

(A) The first supplies a context for the argument; the second is the argument's main conclusion.
Wrong - second is not the main conclusion

(B) The first introduces a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second is a state of affairs that the argument denies will be part of that outcome.
Wrong - the second is not related to the outcome at all. It cannot accept or deny whether it is a part of that outcome

(C) The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that prediction.
Wrong - second is not a consideration against the prediction. Prediction is about saving money by using modified seeds. Just because people like modified seeds, farmers won't save money by using them i.e. the cost will not go down. Note that the revenue farmers earn may increase because people like these seeds but the cost of using them will not decrease.

(D) The first provides a certain outcome that the agrument seeks to weigh against; the second is a consideration that support the main conclusion.
Correct.

(E) The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion.
Wrong - First does not provide evidence to support conclusion

Hi VeritasPrepKarishma, can you please help me understand how agrument is seeking to weigh against First bold face sentence.
It looks like, from the argument, the author is acknowledging the fact in first bold face and providing an alternative explanation for why the plan may work.
Manager
Joined: 09 Nov 2015
Posts: 65
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Dec 2015, 01:50
Premise :- Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage.
Counter Conclusion :- Unfortunately, the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones.
Counter premise :- Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer.

Conclusion :- However,since consumer demand for grains, fruits, and vegetables grown without the use of pesticides continues to rise, the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread

Required is Counter + Support for conclusion

IMO :- D
Intern
Joined: 09 Aug 2014
Posts: 21
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Dec 2015, 05:18
Does anyone tell me OA is C or D? I'm confused when i read the explanation here
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... t2270.html
OA is C, right?
Intern
Joined: 07 Jan 2016
Posts: 23
Schools: AGSM '18
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Mar 2016, 01:34
try to diagram the argument, numbering each of the sentences and using the 'THEREFORE TEST' (try 'x, therefore y' and 'y, therefore x', and see which, if either, of them makes sense).

1 Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage.
2 Unfortunately, the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones.
3 Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer.
4 However, since consumer demand for grains, fruits, and vegetables grown without the use of pesticides continues to rise, the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread.

the structure of this argument is:
1 = background fact
2, therefore 3
however, 4 (which weakens conclusion 3)

if you figure out that much, then it's clear that #3 is the CONCLUSION. (that's the single most important thing you can do on critical reasoning: figure out what's the conclusion.)

since neither of the boldface portions is the conclusion, choice a and choice d are dead. (both of those claim that the second part is the conclusion.)

now, analyze the boldface parts a little better:
#2 (the first boldface) serves as a premise for #3
#4 (the second bold) serves as a counterpoint to #3, weakening the lasting value of the conclusion
...which is basically what choice c says.

choice b is tempting, but you should note that the argument is specifically designed to point out that this 'state of affairs' CAN affect the outcome. choice e is nonsensical, as the two boldfaces are on completely opposite sides of the proverbial fence.

(Source: Ron Purewal)
Intern
Joined: 04 May 2016
Posts: 2
GPA: 3.25
WE: Accounting (Real Estate)
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 May 2016, 20:45
2
(Background information) Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage. (Counter premise) Unfortunately, the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones. (Counter-conclusion) Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer. (Premise - "However," changes direction of argument, everything prior to this statement is now the Counter argument) However,since consumer demand for grains, fruits, and vegetables grown without the use of pesticides continues to rise, (Main Conclusion) the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread.

**After identifying paragraph structure, should be able to move quickly through answer choices - moving wrong to right**

In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first supplies a context for the argument,; the second is the argument's main conclusion. - The first sentence is background info, not the first bold. eliminate
(B) The first introduces a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second is a state of affairs that the argument denies will be part of that outcome. - Huh? Leave in for now
(C) The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that prediction. - For argument; Against argument <-- Nope. We've already determined the first bold is a counter-premise and second is supporting main conclusion.
(D) The first provides a certain outcome that the agrument seeks to weigh against; the second is a consideration that support the main conclusion. - Counter-premise; Premise to the main conclusion
(E) The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion. - Nope. We've already determined the first bold is a counter-premise.
Intern
Joined: 07 May 2016
Posts: 23
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2016, 18:29
Another bad CR question. People are saying the second half of C is wrong, when the first half of D is even more wrong.

" the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones" is not an outcome... The sentence after that is the outcome. I can see why C is wrong, but D is also wrong. Maybe the test makers fell asleep on this question.
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8531
Location: Pune, India
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2016, 20:48
1
r0ckst4r wrote:
Another bad CR question. People are saying the second half of C is wrong, when the first half of D is even more wrong.

" the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones" is not an outcome... The sentence after that is the outcome. I can see why C is wrong, but D is also wrong. Maybe the test makers fell asleep on this question.

It is an outcome of "Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage."
They have created seeds that are resistant to insect damage. The outcome of modifying the seeds is that these modified seeds are expensive and need more fertilizer and water.

You cannot brush aside official questions as bad questions. Try to understand what is going on. You could get something very similar on your test too.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

GMAT self-study has never been more personalized or more fun. Try ORION Free!

Director
Joined: 30 Jan 2016
Posts: 791
Location: United States (MA)
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Sep 2016, 21:06
"However" is used to "weigh against", and the main conclusion is "seeds will become widespread". Is it how it works?

Unfortunately,
Premise 1. the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones.
Sub-conclusion: Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer.

The first provides a certain outcome that the agrument seeks to weigh against;

However (weigh against)

Counter-argument and Premise 2: since consumer demand for grains, fruits, and vegetables grown without the use of pesticides continues to rise,

Main conclusion: the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread.

The second is a consideration that support the main conclusion.
_________________

Non progredi est regredi

Intern
Joined: 07 May 2016
Posts: 23
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

15 Sep 2016, 09:57
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
r0ckst4r wrote:
Another bad CR question. People are saying the second half of C is wrong, when the first half of D is even more wrong.

" the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones" is not an outcome... The sentence after that is the outcome. I can see why C is wrong, but D is also wrong. Maybe the test makers fell asleep on this question.

It is an outcome of "Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage."
They have created seeds that are resistant to insect damage. The outcome of modifying the seeds is that these modified seeds are expensive and need more fertilizer and water.

You cannot brush aside official questions as bad questions. Try to understand what is going on. You could get something very similar on your test too.

I'm not brushing it aside. You are making the assumption the test makers' questions are foolproof - that is not the case. You replied saying the outcome is that the seeds are expensive which is what I'm trying to say. The bold portion itself IS NOT an outcome. An outcome is a consequence, the bold portion in by no means is a consequence, result or causation. Furthermore, answer D says it is "an outcome the argument seeks to weigh against". The argument isn't weight against "the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones" its weighing against the sentence AFTER the bold portion. It's just plain wrong.
Manager
Joined: 13 Sep 2016
Posts: 120
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

09 Oct 2016, 01:42
sondenso wrote:
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage. Unfortunately, the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones. Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer. However,since consumer demand for grains, fruits, and vegetables grown without the use of pesticides continues to rise, the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread.

In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first supplies a context for the argument; the second is the argument's main conclusion.
(B) The first introduces a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second is a state of affairs that the argument denies will be part of that outcome.
(C) The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs againstthat prediction.
(D) The first provides a certain outcome that the agrument seeks to weigh against; the second is a consideration that support the main conclusion.
(E) The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion.

Spoiler: :: Click for OA
OA = D. Check Karishma's post on second page for explanation

Can anyone please share POE for above problem?
Intern
Joined: 21 Jul 2016
Posts: 37
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Operations
WE: Other (Computer Software)
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Oct 2016, 21:05
1

Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage - General Information
Unfortunately, the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones - Premise by the author
Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer - Intermediate conclusion by author
However,since consumer demand for grains, fruits, and vegetables grown without the use of pesticides continues to rise - Premise by author
the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread- Main conclusion by athor

Fist BF statement is a premise that provide a conclusion - savings would be less. So, if BF is applicable, a consequence or an outcome happens in result. Second BF is a prediction by author. And it supports main conclusion
Current Student
Joined: 31 Dec 2015
Posts: 54
Location: India
GMAT 1: 670 Q44 V38
GMAT 2: 680 Q44 V39
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

30 Mar 2017, 22:38
It's clearly between C & D.

I think the problem with C is that it states the first Boldface is a "development".

How is the statement "Unfortunately, the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones" a development? It is more like a fact, to me.

I refuted C, based on that, and went for D.
Intern
Joined: 04 Oct 2016
Posts: 8
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Apr 2017, 21:53
Can someone please explain why D is correct
Verbal Forum Moderator
Joined: 13 Feb 2015
Posts: 415
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

31 Jul 2017, 11:26
Merged topics. Please, search before posting questions!
_________________

Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 8531
Location: Pune, India
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

07 Sep 2017, 20:57
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
sondenso wrote:
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage. Unfortunately, the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones. Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer. However,since consumer demand for grains, fruits, and vegetables grown without the use of pesticides continues to rise, the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread.

In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first supplies a context for the argument; the second is the argument's main conclusion.
(B) The first introduces a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second is a state of affairs that the argument denies will be part of that outcome.
(C) The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs againstthat prediction.
(D) The first provides a certain outcome that the agrument seeks to weigh against; the second is a consideration that support the main conclusion.
(E) The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion.

Responding to a pm:

What is the essence of the argument?
Genetically modified seeds are highly resistant to insects. But they are more expensive and need more fertilizer and water. So farmers won't save money by using them (prediction).
But people like them so their use will keep increasing (conclusion).

So what part is in bold? Let me underline it to show clearly...

Genetically modified seeds are highly resistant to insects. But they are more expensive and need more fertilizer and water. So farmers won't save money by using them (prediction).
But people like them so [i]their use will keep increasing (conclusion)

(A) The first supplies a context for the argument; the second is the argument's main conclusion.
Wrong - second is not the main conclusion

(B) The first introduces a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second is a state of affairs that the argument denies will be part of that outcome.
Wrong - the second is not related to the outcome at all. It cannot accept or deny whether it is a part of that outcome

(C) The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that prediction.
Wrong - second is not a consideration against the prediction. Prediction is about saving money by using modified seeds. Just because people like modified seeds, farmers won't save money by using them i.e. the cost will not go down. Note that the revenue farmers earn may increase because people like these seeds but the cost of using them will not decrease.

(D) The first provides a certain outcome that the agrument seeks to weigh against; the second is a consideration that support the main conclusion.
Correct.

(E) The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion.
Wrong - First does not provide evidence to support conclusion

Responding to a pm:

Quote:
Hi there,

What do you think about the explanation provided by Manhattan Prep?

https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... t2270.html

The answer choices are slightly different, but that doesn't seem to have an impact on the reasoning (basically, they say it's C and you say it's not C).

The answer choice I selected was D however, the wording is not the same as the one on this page/discussion.
My option D states: The first provides evidence to support a prediction that the argument seeks to defend; the second is that prediction.
Option C appears to be consistent on all three pages (this page, Manhattan and mine).

Boldface questions are my weakest in Verbal and I am still torn between D and C.

The conclusion of the argument is the author's opinion. It is the reason he writes the argument. I disagree with the explanation provided in the link above. The conclusion of this argument is "their use will keep increasing" - that is the final word of the author. He starts by giving the drawbacks but provides a reason which he believes will overshadow the drawbacks and arrives at the conclusion that the use of genetically modified seeds will keep increasing.

"Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer." is a prediction based on the drawbacks he discusses, not the conclusion of the argument.

(C) is wrong as discussed above.
(C) The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that prediction.
Wrong - second is not a consideration against the prediction. Prediction is about saving money by using modified seeds. Just because people like modified seeds, farmers won't save money by using them i.e. the cost will not go down. Note that the revenue farmers earn may increase because people like these seeds but the cost of using them will not decrease.

(D) is correct
(D) The first provides a certain outcome that the agrument seeks to weigh against; the second is a consideration that support the main conclusion.

The argument says "their use will keep increasing". The argument weighs against the drawbacks in the first three lines.
The second bold face supports the main conclusion.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor

GMAT self-study has never been more personalized or more fun. Try ORION Free!

Manager
Joined: 12 Mar 2017
Posts: 235
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
GMAT 1: 630 Q49 V27
GPA: 4
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Mar 2018, 06:53
VeritasPrepKarishma wrote:
sondenso wrote:
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage. Unfortunately, the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones. Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer. However,since consumer demand for grains, fruits, and vegetables grown without the use of pesticides continues to rise, the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread.

In the argument given, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

(A) The first supplies a context for the argument; the second is the argument's main conclusion.
(B) The first introduces a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second is a state of affairs that the argument denies will be part of that outcome.
(C) The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs againstthat prediction.
(D) The first provides a certain outcome that the agrument seeks to weigh against; the second is a consideration that support the main conclusion.
(E) The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion.

Responding to a pm:

What is the essence of the argument?
Genetically modified seeds are highly resistant to insects. But they are more expensive and need more fertilizer and water. So farmers won't save money by using them (prediction).
But people like them so their use will keep increasing (conclusion).

So what part is in bold? Let me underline it to show clearly...

Genetically modified seeds are highly resistant to insects. But they are more expensive and need more fertilizer and water. So farmers won't save money by using them (prediction).
But people like them so [i]their use will keep increasing (conclusion)

(A) The first supplies a context for the argument; the second is the argument's main conclusion.
Wrong - second is not the main conclusion

(B) The first introduces a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second is a state of affairs that the argument denies will be part of that outcome.
Wrong - the second is not related to the outcome at all. It cannot accept or deny whether it is a part of that outcome

(C) The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that prediction.
Wrong - second is not a consideration against the prediction. Prediction is about saving money by using modified seeds. Just because people like modified seeds, farmers won't save money by using them i.e. the cost will not go down. Note that the revenue farmers earn may increase because people like these seeds but the cost of using them will not decrease.

(D) The first provides a certain outcome that the agrument seeks to weigh against; the second is a consideration that support the main conclusion.
Correct.

(E) The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion.
Wrong - First does not provide evidence to support conclusion

VeritasPrepKarishma

I got your point regarding option C. Second part is indeed not a consideration against the prediction. But I somehow feel that first part of option D is similar to second part of option C. Dont you think?
Intern
Joined: 14 Apr 2017
Posts: 4
Location: Indonesia
GMAT 1: 680 Q48 V35
GPA: 4
WE: General Management (Internet and New Media)
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Mar 2018, 11:03
Here are the steps I take to arrive at D:

1) We identify the conclusion.
Conclusion: the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread.

2) We identify the role of first bold statement and second bold statement for the conclusion.
First bold statement: premise against the conclusion. If the seeds are expensive and more fertilisers are required, farmers will don't have enough incentive to use genetically engineered seeds.
Second bold statement: premise for.
Manager
Joined: 30 Jul 2014
Posts: 137
GPA: 3.72
Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Jun 2018, 07:01
I opted choice C with fully reading option D - and here I made a mistake.
Let's represent two costs by two parallel lines -> Upper one for price of organic vegetables; and lower one -> cost of production.
If I draw two parallel lines, then if the above one goes up that does not mean that the lower one will go down further.
Thanks.
_________________

A lot needs to be learned from all of you.

Re: Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce &nbs [#permalink] 25 Jun 2018, 07:01

Go to page   Previous    1   2   [ 38 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by