Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce cro

Question

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. Accordingly,  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, according to the argument, contributes to bringing about that outcome.

C. The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that tends to weigh against that prediction.

D. The first provides evidence to support a prediction that the argument seeks to defend; the second is that prediction.

E. The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion.

(CR05080)

EMPOWERgmatVerbal · Accepted Answer

553. 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. Accordingly, 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, according to the argument, contributes to bringing about that outcome.
C. The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that tends to weigh against that prediction.
D. The first provides evidence to support a prediction that the argument seeks to defend; the second is that prediction.
E. The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion.

Type : Bolded Statement
 BID (Boil It Down) : Although expensive now, engineered seeds likely to be popular
 Conclusion : The use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread.
 Evidence : Consumer demand for grains, fruits, and vegetables grown without the use of pesticides continues to rise.
 Goal :  Define the role of each statement, and the relationship between the two .  Statement 1 tells us about an advance in seed tech to resist insect damage. Statement 2 reveals that most farmers won’t be financially advantaged by the technology.

Choice C is correct. The development introduced by the statement is the use of genetic engineering. The prediction is the conclusion: this use of genetically engineered seeds will become widespread. The second statement is that the farmers would not be compensated enough to use the genetically engineered seeds, which is a consideration that weighs AGAINST the prediction that the seeds will become widespread.

A. The first statement does provide context, but the second is not the conclusion, as shown in the analysis above.

B. The description of the first statement matches the correct choice well, but the second statement goes AGAINST the conclusion, as described in the explanation to the correct choice.

D. The first statement does not directly support a prediction, and the second statement is not a prediction.

E. The statements do not support the conclusion that the use of genetically engineered seeds is likely to become widespread. This is particularly true for the second statement, which supports the idea that the seeds might NOT become widespread.

C

daagh · Answer

I append herewith a personal note file on this this theme of  bold face questions , both in GMAT and GRE(RC). Those who are in need and are curious may open the file.

daagh

Kurtosis · Answer

Question Type: Boldface

Argument: Use of genetic seeds is likely to become widespread.

A. The first supplies a context for the argument; the second is the argument's main conclusion. - BF2 isn't 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, according to the argument, contributes to bringing about that outcome. - BF2 says use of genetic engineered seeds isn't going to become widespread because of the cost issues that are highlighted. In a way, BF2 doesn't support BF1.

C. The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that tends to weigh against that prediction. - Correct

D. The first provides evidence to support a prediction that the argument seeks to defend; the second is that prediction. - BF1 doesn't defend BF2.

E. The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion. - As explained in C, BF2 doesn't support the main conclusion.

Answer: C

shruti.shambhavi · Answer

Answer is C.

In my opinion the first boldface plays the role of background information and the second boldface is a counter premise.

A. The first supplies a context for the argument; the second is the argument's main conclusion.
The first part of the statement is correct but the main conclusion of the argument is "The growth of engineered seeds...widespread".

B. The first introduces a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second is a state of affairs that, according to the argument, contributes to bringing about that outcome.
First part of the statement is correct but the second part is not that outcome it is meant to contribute to. It is the exact opposite of the outcome it is meant to contribute to.

C. The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that tends to weigh against that prediction.
Right answer.

D. The first provides evidence to support a prediction that the argument seeks to defend; the second is that prediction.
The second is not the prediction the argument seeks to defend. Prediction is the conclusion and we have identified the conclusion to be the last line in the argument.

E. The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion.
Both boldfaces are not premises, one is background information and another is a counterpremise.

GyMrAT · Answer

Question Type: Bold face

Conclusion: Since consumer demand for items without pesticides continues to rise, the use of genetically engineered seeds is here to stay.

Analysis:
Bold face 1: States a fact, that introduces the argument & acts as a opening premise for the conclusion

Bold face 2: It states one of the probable consequences of use of genetically engineered seeds, citing the cost implication for the farmers. This acts as a counter argument against the conclusion.

A. The first supplies a context for the argument; the second is the argument's main conclusion. - Incorrect, the second part 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, according to the argument, contributes to bringing about that outcome. - Incorrect. The second part does not contribute to bring about the argument.
 
C. The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that tends to weigh against that prediction. -  Correct. 
 
D. The first provides evidence to support a prediction that the argument seeks to defend; the second is that prediction. - Incorrect. the first does not support the second part
 
E. The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion. - Incorrect, the second does not support the conclusion.

Answer C.

Thanks,
GyM

aragonn · Answer

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

verdict : 1st is supporting conclusion. 2nd is assumption which is weakening the conclusion.

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. ---- 2nd 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, according to the argument, contributes to bringing about that outcome. --- 1st seems ok. 2nd is not correct.

C. The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that tends to weigh against that prediction. --- most close and on the lines of verdict.

D. The first provides evidence to support a prediction that the argument seeks to defend; the second is that prediction. --- 2nd is not a prediction. 1st is also not the best.

E. The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion. --- wrong.

aragonn · Answer

Question of same type: https://gmatclub.com/forum/plant-scient ... 59269.html https://gmatclub.com/forum/plant-scient ... 42128.html

ArupRS · Answer

gmat1393 ,  GMATNinja ,  GMATNinjaTwo ,  nightblade354 ,  generis  and  daagh

A different question though. Is it an elliptical construction - Unfortunately, the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well  than normal ones.  ?

regards,
Arup Sarkar

daagh · Answer

C is the answer; 
The first boldface is the development of new modern strategy that leads people to predict that a major positive improvement is on hand. The second opposes the prediction and says that the prediction is bound to fail because the prediction lacks commercial sense.

It is important to note that neither of them is a conclusion.

TheUltimateWinner · Answer

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. Accordingly,  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.
 --->  One sided (this choice is one sided) 
B. The first introduces a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second is a state of affairs that, according to the argument, contributes to bringing about that outcome.
 -->  One sided (this choice is one sided) 
C. The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that tends to weigh against that prediction.
 -->  OPPOSING WAY 
D. The first provides evidence to support a prediction that the argument seeks to defend; the second is that prediction.
 -->  One sided (this choice is one sided) 
E. The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion.
-->  One sided (this choice is one sided)

To solve boldface question, it is better (or, the best way, probably) to know which part is possessed by whom.
  Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage  .--->   Author/narrator/speaker's part  .

Unfortunately, the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones. --> OTHER SIDE's part

Accordingly,  for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer  .-->   OTHER SIDE's part.

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. --> Author/narrator/speaker's part.

Here, the green and blue are different parts from different people (author Vs OTHERs). So,  we need something   opposing  NOT  supporting  .

Foi2Evei2 · Answer

Hi  GMATNinja ,

I have the question between option (C) and (D). I am not sure this is correct logic to eliminate (D) or not. Please help to validate

From the context, I can summarise like this;

Fact = Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage.
 
 Prediction#1  = for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer.
 Premise supports #1  = Unfortunately, the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones.

Prediction#2  = the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread.
 Premise supports #2  = since consumer demand for grains, fruits, and vegetables grown without the use of pesticides continues to rise

From my understanding, (D) is not correct because BF#1 is not the evidence directly supporting the prediction#1 BUT BF#2 is correct that is the prediction#1 which the argument is trying to defend -- using prediction#2

penco · Answer

Can BF2 be termed as a prediction?
And, the explanation that it is providing a context, used in A, can it be termed as right?
And, the E says, each provide evidence.
For evidence, do the statement need to fully determine the conclusion or it can also be lending just partial support?
Any help would be appreciated.

GMATNinja   AndrewN   egmat   EMPOWERgmatVerbal   mikemcgarry   AjiteshArun 
 generis

satish_sahoo · Answer

Heart of the passage/Conclusion: 
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.

Intuitive approach & POE:

a) The first supplies a context for the argument; the second is the argument's main conclusion.
-  The first supplies a context for the argument , to be honest this looks' pretty good. We are getting context about engineered seeds who are supposed to be resistant to insecticide.
-  the second is the argument's main conclusion  - Clear No.

Eliminate A

b) The first introduces a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second is a state of affairs that, according to the argument, contributes to bringing about that outcome.
-  The first introduces a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome  - Yes, the engineered seeds producing crops that are resistant to insecticides and the argument predicts that the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread.
-  the second is a state of affairs that, according to the argument, contributes to bringing about that outcome .- NO, The second actually opposes the prediction and gives more reasons how farmers won’t be able to make money or sustain with the highly expensive engineered seeds.

Eliminate B

c) The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome; the second acknowledges a consideration that tends to weigh against that prediction.
-  The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome  - Yes, we already agreed to this above.
-  the second acknowledges a consideration that tends to weigh against that prediction .- Yes, the second gives more reason that this prediction should not sustain and does eventually weighs AGAINST the prediction.

Keep C.

d) The first provides evidence to support a prediction that the argument seeks to defend; the second is that prediction.
-  The first provides evidence to support a prediction that the argument seeks to defend  - Although the evidence part looks a bit tricky, feels more like a context, but still nothing wrong in this i guess, safe to move coz it does provide support for the argument and it's conclusion. 
-  the second is that prediction . - NO, this helped a lot to eliminate frankly. Last sentence was the prediction IMO.

Eliminate D.

e)  The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion .
- The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion - Funny answer, clearly both goes in opposite directions. I have eliminated this in the first pass.

Eliminate E.

Picking C here.

P.S. I am no expert here, just trying to put my thought process so actual experts or fellow community members can point out if there are any flaws in my reasoning.

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.

Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce cro

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

Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce cro

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