Last visit was: 29 Apr 2026, 13:01

It is currently 29 Apr 2026, 13:01

Toolkit

Practice Tests

Critical Reasoning (CR)

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

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel

Back to Forum

Create Topic

The country of Virodia has, until now, been barely self-sufficient in

1 2

PyjamaScientist

Admitted - Which School Forum Moderator

Joined: 25 Oct 2020

Last visit: 04 Apr 2026

Posts: 1,125

Own Kudos:

1,358

Given Kudos: 633

Schools: Ross '25 (M$)

GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42 (Online) Verified score

Products:

Schools: Ross '25 (M$)

GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V42 (Online) Verified score

Posts: 1,125

Kudos: 1,358

Updated on: 26 May 2022, 04:34

Originally posted by PyjamaScientist on 26 May 2022, 04:31.
Last edited by PyjamaScientist on 26 May 2022, 04:34, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos

Bookmarks

Suruchim12

Hi MartyTargetTestPrep @VeritasKarishma
Can you explain why A is out of scope?
If an increase in prod. of grain is highly unlikey but the demand for meat is going to go up in virodia, the grain land being turned into pastures for cattle for meat should be the next likely step for Virodia right? Which therefore is supported by the info provided.
Or are we saying that because the info provided clearly mentions Virodia to be barely self- sufficient, we are assuming that it can't take this step.
TIA!

Hi Suruchim12,

Though I am not Marty, I think I can help you.

As we dealing with an "Inference" type question, the information given in the stimulus is the "ingredient". Meaning, we can only use that "information" and nothing else. (A) talks about turning farmlands into pasturelands. Is there any indication of that in our stimulus? No.

You may come up with, but wait, there is no mention of "importing grains" either. But, is there any indication of this? Yes.
This is how-

1. Stimulus tells us that you need several pounds of grains to produce one pound of meat.
2. Stimulus tells us that meat consumption is going to rise with rising prosperity in Virodia.
3. Stimulus tells us that there is not going to be an increase in grain production.

So, you can make that logical inference that "Virodia" in this case scenario can very well cover the "lessening of grain production" and "increase in meat consumption" by importing either of them. You may call it a jump, but this jump is not as big as the jump in (A). So, this (E) is a better choice than (A) because there is no information provided in the stimulus about the pasturelands or farmlands and whether converting one into another will solve the issue.

Hope it helps.

MartyTargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep Representative

Joined: 24 Nov 2014

Last visit: 11 Aug 2023

Posts: 3,471

Own Kudos:

5,645

[1]

Given Kudos: 1,430

Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect

Affiliations: Target Test Prep

GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

Expert

Expert reply

GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

Posts: 3,471

Kudos: 5,645

[1]

26 May 2022, 04:34

Kudos

Bookmarks

Suruchim12

Can you explain why A is out of scope?

If an increase in prod. of grain is highly unlikey but the demand for meat is going to go up in virodia, the grain land being turned into pastures for cattle for meat should be the next likely step for Virodia right? Which therefore is supported by the info provided.

Or are we saying that because the info provided clearly mentions Virodia to be barely self- sufficient, we are assuming that it can't take this step.

As you just suggested, choice (A) is not "out of scope." Rather, what it says doesn't make sense.

The passage says that Virodia is barely self-sufficient in production of grain and meat and that production of meat requires grain. This information means that Virodia's production of meat is currently CONTSTRAINED by its production of grain. Furthermore, the passage says that increases in domestic grain production are unlikely.

So, it doesn't make sense that, as (A) says, some land in Virodia that is currently used for grain production will soon be turned into pastureland for grazing cattle for meat. After all, without the grain produced by that land, Virodia will be unable to produce even as much meat as it is currently producing. So, the change described by (A) would result in a reduction in capability to produce meat rather than an increase.

brianmontanaweb

Joined: 06 Apr 2022

Last visit: 03 Sep 2022

Posts: 108

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 22

Posts: 108

Kudos: 15

30 May 2022, 10:41

Kudos

Bookmarks

parkhydel

The country of Virodia has, until now, been barely self-sufficient in both meat and grain. Greater prosperity there has gone hand in hand with steadily increasing per capita consumption of meat, and it takes several pounds of grain used as feed to produce one pound of meat. Per capita income is almost certain to rise further, yet increases in domestic grain production are unlikely.

Which of the following is most strongly supported by the information given?

A. Some land in Virodia that is currently used for grain production will soon be turned into pastureland for grazing cattle for meat.

B. In the future, per capita income in Virodia is unlikely to increase as rapidly as it has in the past.

C. In Virodia, the amount of grain it takes to produce one pound of meat is likely to increase in coming years.

D. Grain is soon likely to make up a larger proportion of the average Virodian's diet than ever before.

E. Virodia is likely to become an importer of grain or meat or both.

CR25550.02

The question wants us to identify the statement that would be the most possible outcome based on the information provided. Virodia hasn't been able to keep up with their meat and grain demand domestically. Meat is more valued than grain in Virodia. The domestic grain production will not increase. The option we want to find should identify the result of the argument.

A is possible, but based on the information in the argument we can determine this is out of scope. Wrong.

B and D neither is mentioned in the argument, so we can eliminate these quickly.

C doesn't make a lot of sense because there is no mention of an increasing demand of grain per pound of meat. The meat isn't becoming more expensive, nor is that mentioned.

E is the most correct, since Virodia is unable to meet(meat LOL) the demand with domestic farming, they would have to look to import. Importing grain or meat or both is a possible outcome. Correct!

ThatDudeKnows

Tutor

Joined: 11 May 2022

Last visit: 27 Jun 2024

Posts: 1,070

Own Kudos:

1,031

Given Kudos: 79

Expert

Expert reply

Posts: 1,070

Kudos: 1,031

30 May 2022, 15:17

Kudos

Bookmarks

parkhydel

"Which of the following is most strongly supported" means we don't need to find a typical conclusion-premise(s) structure. What are we told?

Prosperity --> increased meat and grain CONSUMPTION.
Increased grain PRODUCTION is unlikely. Well, if we're going to use more but we aren't going to make more, where is it going to come from?!?

A. Some land in Virodia that is currently used for grain production will soon be turned into pastureland for grazing cattle for meat.
Nothing in the argument tells us about conversion of land from one specific use to another. Wrong.
B. In the future, per capita income in Virodia is unlikely to increase as rapidly as it has in the past.
We are told that per capita income is going to rise but are given no information about whether it will be as fast as, slower than, or the same as the previous rate of increase. Wrong.
C. In Virodia, the amount of grain it takes to produce one pound of meat is likely to increase in coming years.
Nothing from the argument tells us anything about how much grain goes into raising meat. Wrong.
D. Grain is soon likely to make up a larger proportion of the average Virodian's diet than ever before.
We aren't told anything about proportions of the diet. Wrong.
E. Virodia is likely to become an importer of grain or meat or both.
Oh! Well that sounds nice! Sure helps explain how we're going to consume more while producing less.

Answer choice E.

PiyushKap

Joined: 09 Jul 2022

Last visit: 24 Sep 2024

Posts: 5

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 151

Posts: 5

Kudos: 2

04 Nov 2022, 03:08

Kudos

Bookmarks

MartyTargetTestPrep

VatsSaraf

hello,
I was going to mark E as my answer but I changed as I thought if meat consumption is going to increase then grain consumption will decrease which can be used in the production of meat and everything would be balanced. not that any other answer looks relevant but this one also seems quite illogical.

The key thing we have to notice is this detail in the passage, "it takes several pounds of grain used as feed to produce one pound of meat."

That information indicates that, even if people eat less grain as they eat more meat, if they consume the same amount of food in terms of pounds of food per person, every pound of meat they eat will take multiple pounds of grain to produce.

For instance, if a person used to eat 1 pound of meat per week and 6 pounds of grain, for a total of 7 pounds of food, now maybe the same person eats 2 pound of meat and 5 pounds of grain. However, although that person is not eating any more pounds of food in total, still 7, more grain gets consumed, because the production of that extra pound of meat takes "several pounds of grain."

In fact, even if the person goes from 1 pound of meat and 6 pounds of grain to two pounds of meat and 3 pounds of grain, STILL more grain will be consumed if it take "several" pounds of grain to produce the additional pound of meat.

In that situation, it's reasonable to conclude that they will have to start importing if they are eating more meat.

Hi!

I totally agree why E is right but up to a extent,
According to me,
The first line of the passage "The country of Virodia has, until now, been barely self-sufficient in both meat and grain" , i interpreted that, this implies that the country is now self sufficient and thus doesnt need any help/imports of any sorts from outside.

So i went with option A
According to A) it implies that, the grain production is not going to increase and instead of grain the cattles get thier "feed" from grazing, thus the reasoning for " increases in domestic grain production are unlikely." is justified.

Pls let me know about your opinion on this.
Thank you

MartyTargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep Representative

Joined: 24 Nov 2014

Last visit: 11 Aug 2023

Posts: 3,471

Own Kudos:

5,645

[2]

Given Kudos: 1,430

Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect

Affiliations: Target Test Prep

GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

Expert

Expert reply

GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

Posts: 3,471

Kudos: 5,645

[2]

04 Nov 2022, 04:28

Kudos

Bookmarks

PiyushKap

The key word is to see that the first sentence says that Virodia has been self-sufficient in grain and mean UNTIL NOW.

So, that statement is about the past and the present, not about the future, whereas the conclusion is about the future.

Quote:

So i went with option A
According to A) it implies that, the grain production is not going to increase and instead of grain the cattles get thier "feed" from grazing, thus the reasoning for " increases in domestic grain production are unlikely." is justified.

The passage says that "INCREASES in grain production are unlikely," but the implication of (A) is that there will be a DECREASE in grain production. Since the passage says nothing that indicates that grain production will decrease, (A) is not supported.

Also, the passage doesn't imply that there is an advantage to having cattle graze rather than consume grain or indicate anything about cattle grazing at all. So, there's really no support for (A).

ellenckh

Joined: 10 Sep 2022

Last visit: 16 Dec 2023

Posts: 19

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 128

Location: China

Schools: HBS

GPA: 3.92

Schools: HBS

Posts: 19

Kudos: 3

14 Jan 2023, 09:43

Kudos

Bookmarks

MartyTargetTestPrep

heidy333

hello
can you please explain why B is wrong?

Here's (B).

(B) In the future, per capita income in Virodia is unlikely to increase as rapidly as it has in the past.

Since this is a Conclusion question, the correct answer will be supported by or follow logically from what the passage says.

The only information the passage provides about the future is the following:

Per capita income is almost certain to rise further.

Increases in domestic grain production are unlikely.

We can also presume given what the passage say that meat consumption will likely increase in the future.

None of those facts or presumptions indicates anything about the rate of increase in per capita income (without our making up some kind of convoluted story, such as, for instance, that meat consumption will result in heart attacks and thus cause a reduction in the rate of increase of per capita income).

So, (B) is not supported by what the passage says.

I chose B and I thought it was the most logical. I still don't quite understand why B is wrong. If there is not enough grain to produce the meat, then the people cannot consume more and more meat. i.e. Eventually, meat consumption will increase less and less rapidly as the maximum meat available are going down. As a result, per capital income (which is linked to increase in meat consumption) will increase less rapidly.

MartyTargetTestPrep

Target Test Prep Representative

Joined: 24 Nov 2014

Last visit: 11 Aug 2023

Posts: 3,471

Own Kudos:

5,645

Given Kudos: 1,430

Status:Chief Curriculum and Content Architect

Affiliations: Target Test Prep

GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

Expert

Expert reply

GMAT 1: 800 Q51 V51 Verified score

Posts: 3,471

Kudos: 5,645

14 Jan 2023, 17:06

Kudos

Bookmarks

ellenckh

Hi ellenckh.

That's an interesting question, and here's what's going on.

Per capita income and meat consumption are linked, but only in one direction. The direction is that increases in per capita income result in increases in meat consumption.

While the passage doesn't specify that the relationship is one way, we can use common knowledge and common sense in answering CR questions, and common knowledge and common sense indicate that the relationship would work in one direction - higher income results in increased meat consumption - and not in the other direction.

So, for there to be an increase in meat consumption, there has to be an increase in per capita income. On the other hand, there does not have to be an increase in meat consumption for there to be an increase in per capita income.

Thus, even if meat consumption does not increase or even decreases, per capita income could still increase.

So, (B) is not supported.

ArnauG

Joined: 23 Dec 2022

Last visit: 14 Oct 2023

Posts: 284

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 199

Posts: 284

Kudos: 43

24 Apr 2023, 22:38

Kudos

Bookmarks

The passage states that Virodia has been barely self-sufficient in both meat and grain, and that greater prosperity has resulted in steadily increasing per capita consumption of meat, which takes several pounds of grain used as feed to produce. The passage also notes that per capita income is likely to continue rising, but increases in domestic grain production are unlikely.

The answer that is most strongly supported by this information is (E) Virodia is likely to become an importer of grain or meat or both, as the country's demand for meat is likely to continue increasing while its domestic grain production is unlikely to keep pace. This implies that Virodia will need to obtain grain and/or meat from other countries in order to meet its needs. Option (A) is unlikely since the passage states that increases in domestic grain production are unlikely, so it would not make sense for land currently used for grain production to be converted to pastureland for cattle. Option (B) is not supported by the passage, which says nothing about the rate of increase in per capita income in the future. Option (C) is also not supported by the passage, which does not give any indication of how the amount of grain needed to produce meat might change over time. Option (D) is also unsupported by the passage, which does not give any indication that grain will make up a larger proportion of the average Virodian's diet.

MoPouyan

Joined: 23 Mar 2021

Last visit: 07 Feb 2025

Posts: 17

Own Kudos:

Given Kudos: 198

Posts: 17

Kudos: 9

28 Nov 2024, 19:44

Kudos

Bookmarks

Argument Construction Breakdown:

Situation:

✔ The country of Virodia is currently just barely able to produce enough meat and grain to meet its needs.

✔ Recently, people in Virodia have been eating more meat, and their incomes are rising, which often leads to even more meat consumption.

✔However, grain production isn’t expected to increase, and producing meat requires a lot of grain (multiple pounds of grain for each pound of meat).

✔Since Virodia is only barely meeting its current needs for both meat and grain, there’s no extra grain available.

Reasoning:

The question asks what is most strongly supported by these details. Let’s think through what would logically follow:

✔ Increased Meat Demand: As incomes rise, more people in Virodia will likely want to eat more meat.
✔ High Grain Requirement for Meat Production: Producing this extra meat will require even more grain, as several pounds of grain are needed for each pound of meat.
✔ Limited Grain Production: Since Virodia’s grain production isn’t expected to rise and it’s already producing only what it needs, it can’t support the additional demand for grain.

Conclusion: If Virodia’s domestic grain production can’t keep up with the demand needed for increased meat consumption, it will need to either:

Import Meat to satisfy the increased demand directly, or
Import Grain to feed livestock and produce more meat domestically, or
Both Import Meat and Grain if both become necessary to meet demand.

The answer supported by these logical steps is that Virodia will likely need to import either grain, meat, or both to meet the future demand for food given the limited increase in domestic production. This reasoning leads directly to the correct answer choice (E) because it addresses the combined need for both resources.

VerbalBot

Non-Human User

Joined: 01 Oct 2013

Last visit: 04 Jan 2021

Posts: 19,425

Own Kudos:

1,010

Posts: 19,425

Kudos: 1,010

22 Dec 2025, 02:27

Kudos

Bookmarks

Automated notice from GMAT Club VerbalBot:

A member just gave Kudos to this thread, showing it’s still useful. I’ve bumped it to the top so more people can benefit. Feel free to add your own questions or solutions.

This post was generated automatically.

1 2

Moderators:

GMATNinja

GMAT Club Verbal Expert

7391 posts

AbhishekP220108

509 posts

bhanu29

363 posts