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

 It is currently 15 Aug 2018, 00:05

### 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

# Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 27 May 2009
Posts: 239
Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 04 Dec 2017, 09:47
13
67
00:00

Difficulty:

55% (hard)

Question Stats:

63% (01:06) correct 37% (01:16) wrong based on 3133 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Edit: This discussion has been retired. Find the new thread HERE

The Official Guide for GMAT Verbal Review 2016

Practice Question
Question No.: SC 78
Page: 262

Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal deposits in the upper twenty centimeters of Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there.

(A) Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there

(B) Baltic Sea sediments, where the growth of industrial activity is consistent with these findings

(C) Baltic Sea sediments, findings consistent with its growth of industrial activity

(D) sediments from the Baltic Sea, findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area

(E) sediments from the Baltic Sea, consistent with the growth of industrial activity there

Originally posted by rohansherry on 25 Aug 2009, 05:26.
Last edited by bb on 04 Dec 2017, 09:47, edited 9 times in total.
Modified Underline
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 2614
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

03 Oct 2012, 08:51
10
3
This is a good modifier question: You may view video solution below. This contains detailed explanation of why original choice is wrong and why other incorrect choices are incorrect.

solo1234 wrote:
In answer D. may you explain why "findings",a noun, can go together with "consistent", an adj, without "be". Thanks

You ask a very good question about the correct answer choice. It is a very good practice to thoroughly review the structure of the correct answer choice. The correct answer choice in this case utilizes a modifier that is called as Noun + Noun Modifier. Here "findings" is the noun part and "consistent with..." is the noun modifier of this noun. I suggest you review the article here for more details on this modifier. It would present a lot more clarity.

Hope this helps.

Regards,

Payal
_________________

| '4 out of Top 5' Instructors on gmatclub | 70 point improvement guarantee | www.e-gmat.com

Senior Manager
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 291
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Aug 2009, 05:57
17
4
IMO D

(A) Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there

which refers to sediments. The sediments cannot be consistent with the growth of industrial activity. out

(B) Baltic Sea sediments, where the growth of industrial activity is consistent with these findings

where refers to sediments which are not a place. out

(C) Baltic Sea sediments, findings consistent with its growth of industrial activity
its has no clear antecedent, perhaps Baltic Sea? can a sea have growth of industrial activity? out

(D) sediments from the Baltic Sea, findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area
correct

(E) sediments from the Baltic Sea, consistent with the growth of industrial activity there
consistent seems to modify the previous clause. In addition there has no clear reference. It can refer to Baltic Sea but as It's already been said the sea has not growth of industrial activity.
##### General Discussion
Director
Joined: 01 Aug 2008
Posts: 627
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

25 Aug 2009, 06:00
rohansherry wrote:
38. Scientists have observed large concentrations of
heavy-metal deposits in the upper twenty centimeters of Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the
growth of industrial activity there.
(A) Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there
(B) Baltic Sea sediments, where the growth of industrial activity is consistent with these findings
(C) Baltic Sea sediments, findings consistent with its growth of industrial activity
(D) sediments from the Baltic Sea, findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area
(E) sediments from the Baltic Sea, consistent with the growth of industrial activity there

D. present participle is correctly modifying the clause.
Director
Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 818
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Nov 2009, 10:25
1
1
pls UNDERLINE

OA-D
OG11 VR Book Q No#79
http://www.manhattangmat.com/forums/og- ... t1560.html

rohansherry wrote:
38. Scientists have observed large concentrations of
heavy-metal deposits in the upper twenty centimeters of Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the
growth of industrial activity there.

(A) Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there
(B) Baltic Sea sediments, where the growth of industrial activity is consistent with these findings
(C) Baltic Sea sediments, findings consistent with its growth of industrial activity
(D) sediments from the Baltic Sea, findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area
(E) sediments from the Baltic Sea, consistent with the growth of industrial activity there

_________________

http://gmatclub.com/forum/math-polygons-87336.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/competition-for-the-best-gmat-error-log-template-86232.html

Intern
Joined: 31 Jul 2010
Posts: 32
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Oct 2010, 10:05
A B C wrong because Baltic Sea sediments is incorrect. it has to be sediments from Baltic sea

Amongst D and E, D removes ambiguity of consistency by specifying findings
_________________

Kudos Never costs your Pocket ! Give when u feel it worthy

Intern
Joined: 24 Jun 2010
Posts: 16
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Oct 2010, 10:09
2
Baltic sea sediments is a wrong usage.It should be sediments from Baltic sea..

similar examples-I talked to the Indian soldier(Too Short)
I talked to the soldier from India(Better)

ural mountain ore ore from the ural mountain
Aegean sea salt salt from Aegean sea

Ergo A,B,C is not correct.

so now it is between D and E.
E is wrong because of "there"

Current Student
Joined: 15 Jul 2010
Posts: 216
GMAT 1: 750 Q49 V42
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

24 Oct 2010, 10:31
D.

I am not sure if there's anything wrong with saying Baltic sea sediments.

I eliminated A, B, C and E for other reasons.

A. which (x)
b. where (x)
c. its (x)
E. consistent....... (x)
_________________

Consider KUDOS if my post was helpful.

My Debrief: http://gmatclub.com/forum/750-q49v42-105591.html#p825487

Manager
Joined: 08 Jun 2011
Posts: 88
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Apr 2012, 12:12
3
Here's the SC question from GMAT Verbal review

38. Scientists have observed large concentrations of
heavy-metal deposits in the upper twenty centimeters of Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there.
(A) Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there
(B) Baltic Sea sediments, where the growth of industrial activity is consistent with these findings
(C) Baltic Sea sediments, findings consistent with its growth of industrial activity
(D) sediments from the Baltic Sea, findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area
(E) sediments from the Baltic Sea, consistent with the growth of industrial activity there

My question is that how come findings seems to modify researche's obeservations?

Is that because -ing modifiers are more flexible and can refer to nouns that are not directly touching them?
Manager
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 157
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Mutual Funds and Brokerage)
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

10 Apr 2012, 13:20
"+ing" modifiers modify the subject of the preceding clause. So the subject in the first clause is the observations, so "findings" refers to those observations
Intern
Joined: 03 Aug 2011
Posts: 35
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

06 Jul 2012, 23:43
1
mikeCoolBoy wrote:
IMO D

(A) Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there

which refers to sediments. The sediments cannot be consistent with the growth of industrial activity. out

(B) Baltic Sea sediments, where the growth of industrial activity is consistent with these findings

where refers to sediments which are not a place. out

(C) Baltic Sea sediments, findings consistent with its growth of industrial activity
its has no clear antecedent, perhaps Baltic Sea? can a sea have growth of industrial activity? out

(D) sediments from the Baltic Sea, findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area
correct

(E) sediments from the Baltic Sea, consistent with the growth of industrial activity there
consistent seems to modify the previous clause. In addition there has no clear reference. It can refer to Baltic Sea but as It's already been said the sea has not growth of industrial activity.

Thanx, But there is one thing here I want to know about:

"Baltic Sea sediments" VS "sediments from the Baltic Sea"

The second one is redundant where we have the first one in Answer Choices. am I right?
_________________

Keep your eyes on the prize: 750

Manager
Joined: 12 Jul 2011
Posts: 124
Concentration: Strategy, Sustainability
Schools: Booth '15 (M)
WE: Business Development (Non-Profit and Government)
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 13 Oct 2012, 10:04
6
1
Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal deposits in the upper twenty centimeters of Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there.

(A) Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there
First, I disagree with some previous posters. I believe the prepositional phrases should be disregarded and which refers to concentrations.

**EDIT (Oct 13, 2012): using are after which refers the reader to the most recent plural noun (sediments). In my original comment, I misspoke. The way the sentence is originally stated (and in option choice A), which are refers to sediments, but this isn't logical and it's understood that it wasn't the author's intent. The author intends to refer to the scientists' observation, which commands a singular verb (in other words, we need which is). Note that although the scientists observed concentrations (plural), their observation (singular) is what the relative clause beginning with which refers to.**

The phrase which are consistent with the growth doesn't match large concentrations. Growth cannot be consistent with concentrations (nor can it be consistent with sediments, centimeters, or deposits, for that matter). Also, Baltic Sea sediments isn't perfectly clear because Baltic Sea is a noun, not an adjective. In conversational speech, we often use nouns as adjectives, but it's not proper.

(B) Baltic Sea sediments, where the growth of industrial activity is consistent with these findings
Baltic Sea sediments is not a place, so where has no application here. Also, the ending is awkwardly worded. Findings are consistent with facts, not the other way around. Again, Baltic Sea sediments is improper.

(C) Baltic Sea sediments, findings consistent with its growth of industrial activity
its has no logical referent. Again, Baltic Sea sediments is improper.

(D) sediments from the Baltic Sea, findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area
This sounds all right.

(E) sediments from the Baltic Sea, consistent with the growth of industrial activity there
Scientists observing concentrations can't be consistent with growth.
_________________

Originally posted by NonYankee on 07 Jul 2012, 00:40.
Last edited by NonYankee on 13 Oct 2012, 10:04, edited 1 time in total.
Intern
Joined: 18 Sep 2012
Posts: 6
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Oct 2012, 20:20
1
1
NonYankee wrote:
Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal deposits in the upper twenty centimeters of Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there.

(A) Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there
First, I disagree with some previous posters. I believe the prepositional phrases should be disregarded and which refers to concentrations. The phrase which are consistent with the growth doesn't match large concentrations. Growth cannot be consistent with concentrations (nor can it be consistent with sediments, centimeters, or deposits, for that matter). Also, Baltic Sea sediments isn't perfectly clear because Baltic Sea is a noun, not an adjective. In conversational speech, we often use nouns as adjectives, but it's not proper.

(B) Baltic Sea sediments, where the growth of industrial activity is consistent with these findings
Baltic Sea sediments is not a place, so where has no application here. Also, the ending is awkwardly worded. Findings are consistent with facts, not the other way around. Again, Baltic Sea sediments is improper.

(C) Baltic Sea sediments, findings consistent with its growth of industrial activity
its has no logical referent. Again, Baltic Sea sediments is improper.

(D) sediments from the Baltic Sea, findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area
This sounds all right.

(E) sediments from the Baltic Sea, consistent with the growth of industrial activity there
Scientists observing concentrations can't be consistent with growth.

In answer D. may you explain why "findings",a noun, can go together with "consistent", an adj, without "be". Thanks
Manager
Joined: 28 Apr 2013
Posts: 143
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE: Medicine and Health (Health Care)
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 22 Nov 2013, 17:35
Here's the SC question from GMAT Verbal review

38. Scientists have observed large concentrations of
heavy-metal deposits in the upper twenty centimeters of Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there.
(A) Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there
(B) Baltic Sea sediments, where the growth of industrial activity is consistent with these findings
(C) Baltic Sea sediments, findings consistent with its growth of industrial activity
(D) sediments from the Baltic Sea, findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area
(E) sediments from the Baltic Sea, consistent with the growth of industrial activity there

My question is that how come findings seems to modify researche's obeservations?

Is that because -ing modifiers are more flexible and can refer to nouns that are not directly touching them?

Findings is noun; here it indicate the observation. So the options are C and D, boh have 'findings', but the option C has pronoun 'its' wrongly indicating the ancient findings, rather than sediments. So right answer D.

_________________

Thanks for Posting

LEARN TO ANALYSE

+1 kudos if you like

Originally posted by rango on 22 Nov 2013, 06:44.
Last edited by rango on 22 Nov 2013, 17:35, edited 1 time in total.
Intern
Joined: 19 Aug 2013
Posts: 17
Location: Germany
Schools: HKU '15 (A)
GMAT 1: 580 Q35 V35
GMAT 2: 690 Q44 V40
GPA: 3.85
WE: Information Technology (Consulting)
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Nov 2013, 09:12
Hmm, I selected E, but seems C is the correct choice. However the sentence sounds very strange to me.
For me, findings is the plural of the noun finding. From pure reading I cannot understand that it refers to the observation...
Manager
Joined: 28 Apr 2013
Posts: 143
Location: India
GPA: 4
WE: Medicine and Health (Health Care)
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Nov 2013, 09:21
wfmd wrote:
Hmm, I selected E, but seems C is the correct choice. However the sentence sounds very strange to me.
For me, findings is the plural of the noun finding. From pure reading I cannot understand that it refers to the observation...

In option E; consistent wrongly indicate Baltic sea; hence wrong

Hope that helps
_________________

Thanks for Posting

LEARN TO ANALYSE

+1 kudos if you like

SVP
Joined: 14 Apr 2009
Posts: 2227
Location: New York, NY
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Nov 2013, 09:40
1
This is one of those booby traps that the GMAT folks try to trick you on.

The general rule is that an -ING verb positioned there modifies the subject.

But do we have an -ING verb?

Initially, it might LOOK like an -ING verb---but actually it's used as a NOUN.

The key is to notice the 's' at the end of FINDINGS. This tells us that we are dealing with a noun here.

Also, if you flip it - it doesn't make sense:

"Findings consistent with the growth of X, scientists have observed..." - it does not make sense for the descriptive phrase to modify the subject SCIENTISTS. Therefore, we know this is not the -ING verb that modifies the subject.

So keep in mind - look out for -ING verbs as possible descriptive phrases modifying the subject - but also be wary of booby traps--cases in which the -ING word is NOT used as a descriptive phrase. In this case, it's used as a noun that further describes what the scientists have observed.
Intern
Joined: 27 Mar 2014
Posts: 17
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

Updated on: 13 Jun 2014, 11:18
Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal deposits in the upper twenty centimeters of Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there.
(A) Baltic Sea sediments, which are consistent with the growth of industrial activity there
(B) Baltic Sea sediments, where the growth of industrial activity is consistent with these findings
(C) Baltic Sea sediments, findings consistent with its growth of industrial activity
(D) sediments from the Baltic Sea, findings consistent with the growth of industrial activity in the area
(E) sediments from the Baltic Sea, consistent with the growth of industrial activity there

Hey everyone, the OA is D, which clearly does not have any issues. My question is about E. How do we know that "consistent with the growth of industrial activity there" modifies something inaccurately? Essentially, I can't seem to identify why this modifier can't modify Baltic Sea or if it does in the first place!. Some responses about this question have said it modifies the scientists observations, but using the noun modifier touch rule, that seems implausible.

Is there a way to systematically ascertain what a modifier modifies when it is at the end of a sentence? When modifiers are at the beginning of the sentence it is much easier to see what they modify, I wonder if there is a way to do that here. Thank you!!
I'm taking the gmat tomorrow, so I probably should know this by now....

Topic is discussed here : scientists-have-observed-large-concentrations-of-heavy-metal-83015.html#p622120

Originally posted by smalluser on 13 Jun 2014, 07:49.
Last edited by WoundedTiger on 13 Jun 2014, 11:18, edited 4 times in total.
Topic name not there and sentence not underlined
Current Student
Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Posts: 45
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
GPA: 3.8
WE: Information Technology (Telecommunications)
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jun 2014, 10:54
Hi,

IMO in the option "E" the phrase consistent with the growth of industrial activity there is modifying Scientists..
Hence eliminate this option.

---------

Kudos if you liked the post. (need them badly)
Current Student
Joined: 24 Feb 2014
Posts: 45
Concentration: Finance, Marketing
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
GPA: 3.8
WE: Information Technology (Telecommunications)
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal  [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jun 2014, 11:04
Option A : which is the problem.
Option B : Where refers to Baltic Sea Sediments which is incorrect. Growth didn't happen in Sediments
Option C : Its does not have an antecedent.
Option D : Perfect
Option E : the phrase consistent with the growth of industrial activity there is modifying Scientists..

Hope that helped....
And don't forget the Kudos...
Cheers. ..And All the best...
Rock it tomorrow...
Re: Scientists have observed large concentrations of heavy-metal &nbs [#permalink] 13 Jun 2014, 11:04

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 50 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Events & Promotions

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.