Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 11:08 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 11:08
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
Close
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
Your Progress

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
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3 
User avatar
Mavisdu1017
User avatar
Joined: 10 Aug 2021
Last visit: 04 Jan 2023
Posts: 360
Own Kudos:
46
Given Kudos: 226
Posts: 360
Kudos: 46
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce cro 30 Oct 2022, 04:42
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
KarishmaB
sondenso
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
Show more
KarishmaB hello expert, I read through your explanation, but I am so confused cuz I met another question, and the part of BF and option C are both the same, but in that question, C is OA. Could you help yo explain? Thanks in advance.
Another question is here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/plant-scient ... 59269.html
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,998
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,998
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce cro 31 Oct 2022, 00:22
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Mavisdu1017
KarishmaB
sondenso
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
KarishmaB hello expert, I read through your explanation, but I am so confused cuz I met another question, and the part of BF and option C are both the same, but in that question, C is OA. Could you help yo explain? Thanks in advance.
Another question is here: https://gmatclub.com/forum/plant-scient ... 59269.html
Show more

The question and the solution given in this thread are correct. The answer is option (D) as mentioned here.

In the other thread you mention, the answer is not option (C). Option (C) is incorrect for the reason I have given in my explanation above. Option (D) is different in that thread and is not the answer either. Ignore that thread.
User avatar
Harshani
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2016
Last visit: 24 Jan 2024
Posts: 35
Own Kudos:
38
Given Kudos: 90
Location: Saudi Arabia
GMAT 1: 460 Q30 V23
GMAT 2: 500 Q39 V20
GMAT 2: 500 Q39 V20
Posts: 35
Kudos: 38
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce cro 01 Aug 2023, 10:02
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
This question is also available as EASY in OG2022 676 (id CR05080) but underlined are different
Using this question and the question in OG2022, I have added the official answers.

Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage. [1] Unfortunately, the seeds themselves are quite expensive, and the plants require more fertilizer and water to grow well than normal ones [2]. Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer.[3] However, since consumer demand for grains, fruits, and vegetables grown without the use of pesticides continues to rise [4], the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread.[5]

[1] The first presents a [technological] development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome. (OG2022)
[2] provides a certain outcome that the argument seeks to weigh against
[3] Acknowlodges a consideration that tends to weigh against that predicition (OG2022)
[4] a consideration that support the main conclusion
[5] Main Conclusion
User avatar
Raman109
User avatar
Joined: 17 Aug 2009
Last visit: 28 Jul 2025
Posts: 805
Own Kudos:
170
 [1]
Given Kudos: 33
Posts: 805
Kudos: 170
 [1]
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce cro 24 Sep 2023, 10:35
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Argument analysis

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. - counter-premise/fact
Thus, for most farmers the savings on pesticides would not compensate for the higher seed costs and the cost of additional fertilizer. - Prediction/intermediate conclusion (savings will not compensate for the higher costs)
However, since consumer demand for grains, fruits, and vegetables grown without the use of pesticides continues to rise, (premise. Bringing a different aspect of demand that may in turn affect the revenues positively even if the costs are higher)
the use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread. (main conclusion)

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

(A) The first supplies a context for the argument (OK); the second is the argument's main conclusion(NO. It's a premise supporting the main conclusion).

(B) The first introduces a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome (ok. A certain outcome is that savings will not be more than costs); the second is a state of affairs that the argument denies will be part of that outcome (No. The author does not deny that BF2 is a part of the outcome. Even if costs stay higher, the BF2 brings a different aspect of demand that may impact on revenue).

(C) The first presents a development that the argument predicts will have a certain outcome (ok); the second acknowledges a consideration that weighs against that prediction (It neither goes against nor supports the earlier prediction. It either goes against the implication of that prediction i.e. demand for genetically engineered seeds may fall or it just brings a different aspect that has not been discussed so far).

(D) The first provides a certain outcome that the argument seeks to weigh against (yes, it provides an outcome, i.e., costs may be more than savings, but the conclusion of the argument goes against in a way to an implication from the prediction - the implication from a prediction is that may be that as the costs are higher than savings the demand for the genetic engineering seeds may go down, but the conclusion goes against that saying that the demand for genetically engineered seeds will increase); the second is a consideration that support the main conclusion (ok).

(E) The first and the second each provide evidence to support the argument's main conclusion. The 1st doesn't support the main conclusion.
User avatar
A_Nishith
User avatar
Joined: 29 Aug 2023
Last visit: 12 Nov 2025
Posts: 455
Own Kudos:
199
Given Kudos: 16
Posts: 455
Kudos: 199
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce cro 09 Oct 2024, 11:52
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Argument Breakdown:
First Boldface: "Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce crop plants that are highly resistant to insect damage."

This is a factual statement about a development (the creation of genetically engineered seeds that are resistant to insect damage). It's a positive outcome, but it's not the final conclusion of the argument.

Second Boldface: "The use of genetically engineered seeds of this kind is likely to become widespread."

This is a predictive statement about the future, indicating that the use of these seeds is expected to become common due to rising consumer demand for pesticide-free produce. It serves as a key point in reaching the final conclusion of the argument.
Now, let's go through (D) carefully:

Option (D):
First part: "The first provides a certain outcome that the argument seeks to weigh against."

The first boldface presents a positive result (resistance to insect damage), but it comes with significant trade-offs (higher costs and additional resource needs). The argument then weighs these benefits against the drawbacks (high seed cost, increased need for fertilizer and water), leading to the main conclusion.
Second part: "The second is a consideration that supports the main conclusion."

The second boldface (predicting that genetically engineered seeds will become widespread) is part of the argument's final conclusion and is supported by the fact that consumer demand for pesticide-free produce is increasing.
Thus, the first boldface provides a result (insect resistance) that must be considered alongside its drawbacks, and the second boldface is a prediction supported by growing consumer demand, which strengthens the conclusion.

Conclusion:
(D) is correct because the first boldface presents an outcome that the argument evaluates, while the second boldface presents a factor (consumer demand) that supports the argument's conclusion.
User avatar
Pablopikachu
User avatar
Joined: 05 Nov 2024
Last visit: 03 Sep 2025
Posts: 35
Own Kudos:
12
Given Kudos: 314
Posts: 35
Kudos: 12
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce cro 19 Mar 2025, 08:11
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi Karishma

On similar lines, what does "development" refer to ? Is it similar to "outcome" ? How is it different from "evidence" or "fact" ? I felt like the first bold face was a fact but all the answer choices have either development or outcome.

Thanks
KarishmaB
r0ckst4r
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.
Show more
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,998
 [1]
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,998
 [1]
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce cro 20 Mar 2025, 05:08
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
With the plethora of options English language provides, we cannot look for one specific word to call it the correct option.

Take this statement for example:
The company's rating has gone up.

It is a fact.
It can be used as evidence to show that the company's stock is a good investment.
It can be called a development e.g. Are you aware of the latest development? No, what is it? The company's rating has gone up.
It can be called an outcome e.g. The company's quarterly result was much better than expected. Its outcome is that the company's rating has gone up.

You see, the same fact can be called many things based on the context. Look at the context in the question. GMAT won't call it a fact every time; it will give contextual words.



Pablopikachu
Hi Karishma

On similar lines, what does "development" refer to ? Is it similar to "outcome" ? How is it different from "evidence" or "fact" ? I felt like the first bold face was a fact but all the answer choices have either development or outcome.

Thanks
KarishmaB
r0ckst4r
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.
Show more
User avatar
SudsMeister
User avatar
Joined: 04 Sep 2019
Last visit: 01 Nov 2025
Posts: 87
Own Kudos:
31
 [1]
Given Kudos: 97
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Sustainability
Schools: LBS '22 (D) Instead Sept 20 Intake CBS '22 (D) Booth '22 (D)
GMAT Focus 1: 705 Q89 V85 DI81
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V42
WE:Education (Non-Profit and Government)
Schools: LBS '22 (D) Instead Sept 20 Intake CBS '22 (D) Booth '22 (D)
GMAT Focus 1: 705 Q89 V85 DI81
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V42
Posts: 87
Kudos: 31
 [1]
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce cro 07 May 2025, 07:04
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
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.

Option D: The first provides a certain outcome that the argument seeks to weigh against; the second is a consideration that support the main conclusion.
Show more
KarishmaB

I have a doubt: how does the argument weigh against BF1 as suggested in option D?

The outcome in BF1 is: GE seeds are expensive, plants require more fertilizer and water than normal ones.
While the argument tries to establish the position that GE seeds' usage will increase.

The argument doesn't say that GE will become less expensive or plants will require less water and fertilizer than normal ones.
Nor does BF1 try to make the claim that GE seeds won't be used widely.
User avatar
KarishmaB
User avatar
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 16,267
Own Kudos:
76,998
Given Kudos: 482
Location: Pune, India
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 16,267
Kudos: 76,998
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce cro 07 May 2025, 22:29
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The argument weighs against the implication of BF1, not the facts given in BF1.
There are two opposing sides and the argument takes the opposite side to BF1. Hence it is acceptable to say that the argument weights against BF1. It is the best option of the given lot.


SudsMeister
Quote:
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.

Option D: The first provides a certain outcome that the argument seeks to weigh against; the second is a consideration that support the main conclusion.
KarishmaB

I have a doubt: how does the argument weigh against BF1 as suggested in option D?

The outcome in BF1 is: GE seeds are expensive, plants require more fertilizer and water than normal ones.
While the argument tries to establish the position that GE seeds' usage will increase.

The argument doesn't say that GE will become less expensive or plants will require less water and fertilizer than normal ones.
Nor does BF1 try to make the claim that GE seeds won't be used widely.
Show more
User avatar
Asan92
User avatar
Joined: 18 Jan 2025
Last visit: 13 Nov 2025
Posts: 4
Own Kudos:
1
Given Kudos: 5
Posts: 4
Kudos: 1
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce cro 26 May 2025, 17:03
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi, Karishma! Why can't Option D be read as "the first is a certain outcome...", instead of "the first results in a certain outcome...".

The former interpretation is similar to Option C, so I wonder why the interpretation does not remain the same. If the interpretation is changed to the former, than Option D is out, because it is NOT an outcome.

Thank you again for all that you do!

KarishmaB
sondenso
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

Answer (D)
Show more
User avatar
Legallyblond
User avatar
Joined: 14 May 2024
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 48
Own Kudos:
1
Given Kudos: 49
Location: India
Posts: 48
Kudos: 1
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce cro 14 Nov 2025, 11:04
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
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, [color=#0f0f0f]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.[/color]

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 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.

[color=#0f0f0f]Related question, can you please explain how C is the correct answer here and not A and also what is the main conclusion if its not last sentence? How is last part not the main conclusion?[/color]

KarishmaB


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.
Show more
User avatar
miag
User avatar
Joined: 10 Dec 2023
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 189
Own Kudos:
73
Given Kudos: 143
Location: India
Concentration: Marketing, Sustainability
GMAT Focus 1: 675 Q87 V83 DI80
Products:
My Reviews GMAT Club Tests
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 675 Q87 V83 DI80
Posts: 189
Kudos: 73
Plant scientists have used genetic engineering on seeds to produce cro Updated on: 18 Nov 2025, 03:56
Originally posted by miag on 18 Nov 2025, 03:55.
Last edited by miag on 18 Nov 2025, 03:56, edited 3 times in total.
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi,

The MC is the last part of the last sentence. The use of these genetically engineered seeds will continue to increase/become widespread.
A) is wrong because as identified above the last part of the last sentence is the main conclusion however the entire BF2 isnt the main conclusion.
C) is not the correct answer here, it is D). I would recommend going through KarishmaB 's above response again as it is quite a clear explanation.

Hope this helps clarify!

sakshijjw
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, [color=#0f0f0f]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.[/color]

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 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.

[color=#0f0f0f]Related question, can you please explain how C is the correct answer here and not A and also what is the main conclusion if its not last sentence? How is last part not the main conclusion?[/color]


Show more
   1   2   3 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
miag
189 posts