Events & Promotions
| Last visit was: 06 Sep 2026, 12:29 |
It is currently 06 Sep 2026, 12:29 |
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Sep 0712:01 AM PDT
-11:59 PM PDT
On the 7th, GMAT Club Tests will be Free! Including all the Quizzes, Questions, and Tests. 12 AM - 11:59 PM PDT
Sep 0712:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Tejas studied hard but kept repeating the same mistakes. After 3 attempts at 645, a focused 4-week strategy helped him identify and fix what was holding him back—leading to a 695 with just 12–15 hours of study per week.- Sep 07
10:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
A complete walkthrough of GMAT Club’s free 12-week GMAT study plan: what you study each week, how progress and goals are tracked, how the error log works, and how your practice unlocks paid tools at no cost. 
Sep 0201:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Take 30% off all study plans with code COURSEWORK - Expires on Monday 9/7
Sep 0401:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
This Labor Day, turn your hard work into real score gains. From 615→715 in 15 days to 705 in 30 days, our students prove what's possible with personalized, expert guidance. Save up to 25% on 1-on-1 tutoring.
Sep 0410:00 AM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
We’ve worked incredibly hard to build TTP into the best test prep experience possible, and it would mean a lot to us to win Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep. If TTP has helped you, we’d be incredibly grateful for your vote.
Sep 0609:30 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EST
Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful EA course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Perfect class schedule and easy course access for working professionals. Class starts Sundays Sept. 6, 2026.- Sep 09
07:00 AM PDT
-10:00 AM PDT
Meet AdComs and explore top Master’s programs - MiM, MiF, MSc, MSBA and more. - Application Fee Waivers - Free 1-Week of GMAT Club Tests: - Master's Application Toolkit - Grand Prize Giveaway - Sep 09
10:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Three MBA applications. Three rejections. No interview invites. A year later, Aman was admitted to Cambridge Judge, SMU, and IMD. In this episode of MBA Admit Stories, Aman shares how he rebuilt his MBA application... 
Sep 1008:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Sep 1507:00 PM EDT
-09:00 PM EST
Elite scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Tues/Thurs Sept. 15, 2026 - Nov. 15, 2027, 7:00pm-9:00pm EST
Sep 2108:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included! Class starts Mon, Tues, Wed, Thur, Fri Sept. 21, 2026 - Oct. 9, 2027, 7:00pm-10:00pm EST
D
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
55%
(hard)
Question Stats:
54% (01:21) correct
46%
(01:32)
wrong
based on 5481
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
To meet the rapidly rising market demand for fish and seafood, suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as their natural growth rate, cutting their feed allotment by nearly half and raising them on special diets.
(A) their natural growth rate, cutting their feed allotment
(B) their natural growth rate, their feed allotment cut
(C) growing them naturally, cutting their feed allotment
(D) they grow naturally, cutting their feed allotment
(E) they grow naturally, with their feed allotment
Similar Question : [as fast as] LINK
(A) their natural growth rate, cutting their feed allotment
(B) their natural growth rate, their feed allotment cut
(C) growing them naturally, cutting their feed allotment
(D) they grow naturally, cutting their feed allotment
(E) they grow naturally, with their feed allotment
Similar Question : [as fast as] LINK
The first and second choices illogically state that the suppliers are not only growing the fish but are also growing the natural growth rate of the fish.
The third choice elliptically states that suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as growing them naturally grows them, but when something grows naturally, it is illogical to say anything grows them. The appropriate contrast is between the rate at which the suppliers are growing the fish and the rate at which the fish grow when allowed to grow naturally on their own.
The fourth and fifth options both express that contrast appropriately. Of these two options, however, only the fourth uses a present participle (cutting) that is parallel to the other verbs in the sentence (growing and raising), and therefore the fourth choice is best.
The third choice elliptically states that suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as growing them naturally grows them, but when something grows naturally, it is illogical to say anything grows them. The appropriate contrast is between the rate at which the suppliers are growing the fish and the rate at which the fish grow when allowed to grow naturally on their own.
The fourth and fifth options both express that contrast appropriately. Of these two options, however, only the fourth uses a present participle (cutting) that is parallel to the other verbs in the sentence (growing and raising), and therefore the fourth choice is best.
To meet the rapidly rising market demand for fish and seafood, suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as they grow naturally, cutting their feed allotment by nearly half and raising them on special diets.
LINK In the 1980's the rate of increase of the minority population of the United States was nearly twice what it was in the 1970's.
An this case, you have a problem of redundancy:
A RATE can't be FAST.
* The rate can be high;
* The increase itself can be fast.
Similarly,
A height can't be tall (a person can be tall, or a height can be greater than...)
A bank account can't be rich (a person can be rich, or a bank account can contain a large amount of money)
etc.
LINK In the 1980's the rate of increase of the minority population of the United States was nearly twice what it was in the 1970's.
An this case, you have a problem of redundancy:
A RATE can't be FAST.
* The rate can be high;
* The increase itself can be fast.
Similarly,
A height can't be tall (a person can be tall, or a height can be greater than...)
A bank account can't be rich (a person can be rich, or a bank account can contain a large amount of money)
etc.
If this question felt shaky,
try an adaptive mini quiz of similar problems in
GMAT Club Forum Quiz →. Free plan gives 5 questions per day.
21 Aug 2013, 14:58
Kudos
Bookmarks
It seems you didn’t quite understand how to split a sentence into its clauses. I would strongly recommend you to revisit the basics of clauses and get a firm grasp on identifying clauses before proceeding any further.
Having said that, let me break the given sentence for you.
To meet the rapidly rising market demand for fish and seafood, suppliers are
o growing fish twice as fast as their natural growth rate,
o cutting their feed allotment by nearly half and
o raising them on special diets.
The given sentence contains only a single clause. However it contains a list as shown.
Now let's discuss the errors in this sentence:
Error 1
Now observe this sentence.
Suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as their natural growth rate.
This sentence has incorrect elliptical usage. This sentence can actually mean either of the following two:
a. Suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as suppliers are growing their natural growth rate.
b. Suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as their natural growth rate is growing fish.
But both these sentences do not make sense and are illogical.
Consider the following simple examples to get an idea on ellipsis.
i. Mike runs faster than a horse (Mike runs faster than a horse runs)
ii. George likes milk better than coffee. (George likes milk better than he likes Coffee)
Now compare these correct usages with the incorrect elliptical usages of the given sentence mentioned above. You can clearly see that the ellipsis used in the given sentence doesn’t make sense. This is a major error in the given sentence.
Error 2
Also, there is another usage error in the sentence.
Observe that “growth rate” is described as “fast”
Let us take a parallel for better understanding
Rate = speed
Now which one of the following do you think is correct?
“Speed is more than something” or “Speed is higher than something” is appropriate
On similar lines, growth rate cannot be faster. Growth rate can be higher.
This is another error in the given sentence.
Error 3
Coming to the pronoun ambiguity, lets first apply our pronoun framework:
To meet the rapidly rising market demand for fish and seafood, suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as their natural growth rate, cutting their feed allotment by nearly half and raising them on special diets.
1: What is the logical antecedent of "their", "they"?
Logically these pronouns must refer to "fish".
2: Are there any other nouns in plural (since the pronouns are plural), that could be referred to by these pronouns?
Yes, these pronouns could refer to "suppliers". Thus, there appears to be ambiguity.
3: Is there any answer choice that solves this ambiguity?
No, all answer choices have similar structure.
Thus, in this question, pronoun ambiguity is acceptable to a certain degree. This question exemplifies the fact that pronoun ambiguity rules are hazy and we must not eliminate answer choices right away based on this error. We must first eliminate the answer choices based on other more definite error types - SV, verb, parallelism, modifiers
You can read the framework for “Pronoun Ambiguity” here.
You can find references to OG Questions dealing with Pronoun ambiguity in the following links
Link 1, Link 2
Concluding Remarks
Your explanations for eliminating the other options can be less ambiguous and more detailed. So with the above sentence structure in mind, I would like you to solve the question again and come up with the solution.
Regards,
Krishna
Having said that, let me break the given sentence for you.
To meet the rapidly rising market demand for fish and seafood, suppliers are
o growing fish twice as fast as their natural growth rate,
o cutting their feed allotment by nearly half and
o raising them on special diets.
The given sentence contains only a single clause. However it contains a list as shown.
Now let's discuss the errors in this sentence:
Error 1
Now observe this sentence.
Suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as their natural growth rate.
This sentence has incorrect elliptical usage. This sentence can actually mean either of the following two:
a. Suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as suppliers are growing their natural growth rate.
b. Suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as their natural growth rate is growing fish.
But both these sentences do not make sense and are illogical.
Consider the following simple examples to get an idea on ellipsis.
i. Mike runs faster than a horse (Mike runs faster than a horse runs)
ii. George likes milk better than coffee. (George likes milk better than he likes Coffee)
Now compare these correct usages with the incorrect elliptical usages of the given sentence mentioned above. You can clearly see that the ellipsis used in the given sentence doesn’t make sense. This is a major error in the given sentence.
Error 2
Also, there is another usage error in the sentence.
Observe that “growth rate” is described as “fast”
Let us take a parallel for better understanding
Rate = speed
Now which one of the following do you think is correct?
- Speed is fast. OR
Speed is more/higher.
“Speed is more than something” or “Speed is higher than something” is appropriate
On similar lines, growth rate cannot be faster. Growth rate can be higher.
This is another error in the given sentence.
Error 3
Coming to the pronoun ambiguity, lets first apply our pronoun framework:
To meet the rapidly rising market demand for fish and seafood, suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as their natural growth rate, cutting their feed allotment by nearly half and raising them on special diets.
1: What is the logical antecedent of "their", "they"?
Logically these pronouns must refer to "fish".
2: Are there any other nouns in plural (since the pronouns are plural), that could be referred to by these pronouns?
Yes, these pronouns could refer to "suppliers". Thus, there appears to be ambiguity.
3: Is there any answer choice that solves this ambiguity?
No, all answer choices have similar structure.
Thus, in this question, pronoun ambiguity is acceptable to a certain degree. This question exemplifies the fact that pronoun ambiguity rules are hazy and we must not eliminate answer choices right away based on this error. We must first eliminate the answer choices based on other more definite error types - SV, verb, parallelism, modifiers
You can read the framework for “Pronoun Ambiguity” here.
You can find references to OG Questions dealing with Pronoun ambiguity in the following links
Link 1, Link 2
Concluding Remarks
Your explanations for eliminating the other options can be less ambiguous and more detailed. So with the above sentence structure in mind, I would like you to solve the question again and come up with the solution.
Regards,
Krishna
31 Jul 2010, 11:41
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hey All,
I was asked to take this one on by private message. So here I am!
What the hell...where is this question from? Friends, never trust a question that isn't grammatically correct in the non-underlined portion. Just ignore it. What's "Special diet"? Do they mean "A special diet"? I don't trust this.
I'd also add that even though we don't have a choice, "they" and "their" are REALLY ambiguous pronouns, possibly referring to "suppliers" or "fish".
To meet the rapid rising market demand for fish and seafood, suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as their natural growth rate, cutting their feed allotment by nearly half and raising them on special diet.
(A) their natural growth rate, cutting their feed allotment
PROBLEM: As many have said, this is a comparison issue. There are two pieces here, and they should be interchangeable (grammatically). Right now, this says "suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as their natural growth rate". That's a verb "are growing" compared to a noun "their natural growth rate". You can't do that.
(B) their natural growth rate, their feed allotment cut
PROBLEM: Same as above. Also, the part after the comma is an odd fragment now. "Cutting" is a present participle, which is what we use when we want to modify the entire previous clause. "Cut" is a past participle, and we don't use it this way.
(C) growing them naturally, cutting their feed allotment
PROBLEM: In this comparison, we still need someone to be doing the "growing", which doesn't make any sense (nobody needs help growing naturally).
(D) they grow naturally, cutting their feed allotment
ANSWER: All good.
(E) they grow naturally, with their feed allotment cut
PROBLEM: Same as the second part of B.
Hope that helps!
-tommy
I was asked to take this one on by private message. So here I am!
What the hell...where is this question from? Friends, never trust a question that isn't grammatically correct in the non-underlined portion. Just ignore it. What's "Special diet"? Do they mean "A special diet"? I don't trust this.
I'd also add that even though we don't have a choice, "they" and "their" are REALLY ambiguous pronouns, possibly referring to "suppliers" or "fish".
To meet the rapid rising market demand for fish and seafood, suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as their natural growth rate, cutting their feed allotment by nearly half and raising them on special diet.
(A) their natural growth rate, cutting their feed allotment
PROBLEM: As many have said, this is a comparison issue. There are two pieces here, and they should be interchangeable (grammatically). Right now, this says "suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as their natural growth rate". That's a verb "are growing" compared to a noun "their natural growth rate". You can't do that.
(B) their natural growth rate, their feed allotment cut
PROBLEM: Same as above. Also, the part after the comma is an odd fragment now. "Cutting" is a present participle, which is what we use when we want to modify the entire previous clause. "Cut" is a past participle, and we don't use it this way.
(C) growing them naturally, cutting their feed allotment
PROBLEM: In this comparison, we still need someone to be doing the "growing", which doesn't make any sense (nobody needs help growing naturally).
(D) they grow naturally, cutting their feed allotment
ANSWER: All good.
(E) they grow naturally, with their feed allotment cut
PROBLEM: Same as the second part of B.
Hope that helps!
-tommy
05 Aug 2008, 14:18
Kudos
Bookmarks
judokan
suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as their natural growth rate
-->
growing fish by suppliers twice as fast as fish natural growth rate
comparing growing fish with rate
Incorrect comparison A, B -- out
C) growing them naturally, cutting their feed allotment
who is growing them naturally.. I don't think, we grow them naturally.. (they (fish) grow themselves naturally).
D)
suppliers are growing fish twice as fast as they grow naturally
growing fish by suppliers[/u] twice as fast as [u]fish grow naturally
proper comparision.
