There are recent reports of apparently drastic declines in amphibian

Question 5

The author never actually rejects a view.

In the first paragraph, the author introduces some claims (from environmentalists).

In the second paragraph, the author says that more information is necessary to evaluate these claims. This isn't the same as rejecting the claims -- the author doesn't say that the environmentalists are wrong. Instead, he/she just says that we need to make some distinctions to see whether they are right or wrong.

In the third paragraph, the author explains why the distinctions above would be important to biologists.

And in the fourth paragraph, the author says that we simply don't have enough information, and if we wait to get that information then it will be too late to save the environment.

So, (D) is out because the author never rejects the environmentalists' interpretation of the population decline. (B) is a much better fit -- the author presents the environmentalists' interpretation, explains why we need more info, and then ends with a warning.

(B) is the correct answer to question 5.

I hope that helps!

can anyone tell me why in question 4 rarest=always rare.
I don't think that always rare means rarest. And "rarest" seems extreme,so I choose it.
GMATNinja

Posted from my mobile device

Question 1

The primary purpose of the passage is to

A. assess the validity of a certain view The author has referred to certain reports and analyzed how valid these reports are

B. distinguish between two phenomena He has pointed out that a declining population is not the same as an endangered population, but this is not the purpose.

C. identify the causes of a problem No problem or solution has been referred to

D. describe a disturbing trend He author has mentioned that population declines are potentially more worrisome than extinctions but describing this trend is not the primary purpose

E. allay concern about a particular phenomenon The author might have pointed out that a certain view is not valid, but he has not attempted to reduce the concern.

Question 2

It can be inferred from the passage that the author believes which of the following to be true of the environmentalists mentioned in lines 5-6?

A. They have wrongly chosen to focus on anecdotal reports rather than on the long-term data that are currently available concerning amphibians. This answer is partially correct. Yes, the environmentalists have wrongly chosen to focus on anecdotal reports rather than on the long-term; however, this long-term data is not available.

B. Their recommendations are flawed because their research focuses too narrowly on a single category of animal species. This answer is partially correct. Yes, one could say that the recommendations are flawed; however, it is not flawed because the research focuses on amphibians.

C. Their certainty that population declines in general are caused by environmental degradation is not warranted. We cannot definitely infer if the author feels that this certainty is warranted or not. Towards the end, the author also seems to have pointed out that postponing environmental action may not be a good idea.

D. They have drawn premature conclusions concerning a crisis in amphibian populations from recent reports of declines. The environmentalists have done exactly that.

E. They have overestimated the effects of chance events on trends in amphibian populations. We cannot definitely infer if the author feels that the environmentalists have overestimated the effects of chance events.


Question 3

It can be inferred from the passage that the author believes which of the following to be true of the amphibian extinctions that have recently been reported?

A. They have resulted primarily from human activities causing environmental degradation. This is what the researches believe, and the author clearly doesn’t agree with the researchers.

B. They could probably have been prevented if timely action had been taken to protect the habitats of amphibian species. The author does not believe that environmental degradation is the cause of the said extinction. So protecting the habitat or the environment doesn’t even figure.

C. They should not come as a surprise, because amphibian populations generally have been declining for a number of years. The author has said that he extinction should not come as a surprise, but it is not because the populations have been declining for a number of years, but because endangered populations are rare and are anyway under the threat of extinction.

D. They have probably been caused by a combination of chance events. The author states that chance events can lead to extinction but not specifically mention this with regard to amphibians. Also, the author claims that chance events can lead to extinction specifically in the case of endangered species, and it has not been stated that amphibians were previously endangered.

E. They do not clearly constitute evidence of general environmental degradation. The reports state that the amphibian crisis is an indication of general environmental degradation. But the author states that the decline of amphibian population can have various causes but that in the case of amphibians, there is too little data to distinguish between these causes.


Question 4


According to the passage, each of the following is true of endangered amphibian species EXCEPT:

A. They are among the rarest kinds of amphibians. The second paragraph says that an endangered species is “always rare.”

B. They generally have populations that are small in size. The second paragraph says that an endangered species is “almost always small.”

C. They are in constant danger of extinction. The second paragraph says that an endangered species is “under constant threat of extinction.”

D. Those with decreasing populations are the most likely candidates for immediate extinction. This has not been mentioned.

E. They are in danger of extinction due to events that sometimes have nothing to do with human activities. The second paragraph says that “chance events may lead to the extinction” of an endangered species.


Question 5

Which of the following most accurately describes the organization of the passage?

A. A question is raised, a distinction regarding it is made, and the question is answered. No question has been raised.

B. An interpretation is presented, its soundness is examined, and a warning is given. The reports have been interpreted, the validity of the reports have been analyzed and a warning is stated in the last sentence.

C. A situation is described, its consequences are analyzed, and a prediction is made. The environmentalists have spoken about a situation: the amphibian crisis. The consequences of this situation has not been analyzed.

D. Two interpretations of a phenomenon are described, and one of them is rejected as invalid. Even if we consider that two interpretations are described, this option does not refer to the analysis off the reports or the warning at the end.

E. Two methods for analyzing a phenomenon are compared, and further study of the phenomenon is recommended. None of these have been done.


Question 6

Which of the following best describes the function of the sentence in lines 35-38 [Anecdotal reports of population decreases cannot distinguish among these possibilities, and some amphibian populations have shown strong fluctuations in the past.]?

A. To give an example of a particular kind of study The sentence addresses anecdotal reports and not studies.

B. To cast doubt on an assertion made in the previous sentence The previous sentence says that we must make distinctions between the various kinds of declines. This supports the highlighted sentence.

C. To raise an objection to a view presented in the first paragraph This sentence raises objection to the environmentalists’ view.

D. To provide support for a view presented in the first paragraph Through the sentence in focus, the author disagrees with the environmentalists' view by stating that the environmentalists' view is not the only one possible

E. To introduce an idea that will be countered in the rest of the paragraph The rest of the paragraph agrees with what has been said in this sentence

- Nitha Jay

GMATNinja, can you please explain why D should be eliminated for Q3?
It is noted in the 2nd par that chance events may lead to extinction.

Question 3

Let's start by considering the question:


So the right answer should be something the author would believe to be true about "the amphibian extinctions that have recently been reported."

Let's now consider (D):


In the second paragraph, the author discusses causes of extinction in general. Among these possible cause of extinctions, the author mentions chance events. But the author does not connect these chance events to the extinctions of amphibians. Nor does the author claim that chance events are the most likely cause of extinctions in general -- chance events are merely one possible cause, which the author cites as an example.

Since we have no reason to believe the author thinks these chance events caused the extinctions of amphibians that have recently been reported, (D) is out.

I hope that helps!

GMATNinja VeritasKarishma
Why Q2 C is incorrect?
2. It can be inferred from the passage that the author believes which of the following to be true of the environmentalists mentioned in lines 5-6?
(C) Their certainty that population declines in general are caused by environmental degradation is not warranted.
3rd and 4th para - The author believes that decline could be due to normal fluctuations. So the claims made by environmentalist that declines are caused by degradation is not certain. The author does not believe this claim. Why C is incorrect then?

The author doesn't say that the environmentalists claim of environmental degradation causing declines in population is not warranted.

In fact, the author himself mentions: "Persistent declines, especially in large populations, indicate a changed ecological context. ", "Unfortunately, long-term data will not soon be forthcoming, and postponing environmental action while we wait for it may doom species and whole ecosystems to extinction."
So he does agree that environmental factors are indeed involved in persistent declines.

Instead the author says that distinction needs to be made between endangered, persistent decline and apparent decline. Long term data gives us this distinction but that data is not available. So the "crisis situation" that the environmentalist's claim from recent reports is premature. The species may not actually be endangered.

Hence (C) is incorrect and (D) is correct.

Can anyone please help me with Q4 here ? I am not able to get the approach. It probably means that I have to take inference from multiple lines in all the paragraphs, but what is the best way to do so ? It is difficult for me to retain so much info at once.

Explanations to all the questions are posted, you just need to scroll, find and read.

Happy Prep.

Take a look at this post and let us know if you have further questions!

In question 4 why Option A is incorrect . Endangered amphibians need not to be rarest among the species . They can be rare species too.

I have not completely understood the reason behind eliminating option C in question 2. Option C and option D look similar to me. It would be of great help if anyone could elaborate along these lines and clarify my doubt.

Thanks

Question 2

Question 2 asks about the author's view on the environmentalists mentioned in lines 5-6. Here's what the author says in those lines:

"...many environmentalists have claimed that immediate environmental action is necessary to remedy this "amphibian crisis", which, in their view, is an indicator of general and catastrophic environmental degradation due to human activity."

Here's (C):


There are a couple of issues with (C). For one, the environmentalists haven't made a claim about population declines "in general." Instead, they make a claim about amphibians specifically. So, the author wouldn't necessarily critique the environmentalists exactly like (C) does.

Also, the author's main quibble with the environmentalists isn't about whether environmental degradation is causing the declines -- the author is more concerned about whether there are really declines at all, and if so, how worrisome are those declines. If there ARE actual declines, the author seems pretty on board with the idea that environmental degradation is at least part of the cause -- such declines would "indicate a changed ecological context."

For these reasons, you can eliminate (C) for question 2.

I hope that helps!

Took me 13 mins 30 sec, 5 correct, 1 wrong.
Is this the optimum time for such a passage?
Any tips?

5. Which of the following most accurately describes the organization of the passage?

(A) A question is raised, a distinction regarding it is made, and the question is answered.
(B) An interpretation is presented, its soundness is examined, and a warning is given.
(C) A situation is described, its consequences are analyzed, and a prediction is made.
(D) Two interpretations of a phenomenon are described, and one of them is rejected as invalid.
(E) Two methods for analyzing a phenomenon are compared, and further study of the phenomenon is recommended.

hi GMATNinjaTwo, VeritasKarishma, MartyTargetTestPrep, AndrewN,VeritasPrepBrian,GMATRockstar
KarishmaB

avigutman, AndrewN,MartyTargetTestPrep

from P2&3, the author compares declining population and endanger population. in P4, authors proposes long-time data, so I think E match.

what's the problem with my reasoning ?

thanks in advance.

About 4 minutes for the passage and 1 minute for each question, for a total of 10 minutes.

For detail on how much time to spend on each Verbal question, see this post.

GMAT Verbal Timing Strategy

Question 5

You're right that the author compares "declining populations" with "endangered populations." However, that doesn't line up with what (E) says: "Two methods for analyzing a phenomenon are compared..."

Endangered populations and declining populations aren't methods for analyzing a phenomenon -- they're just useful terms to clarify the situation.

Eliminate (E) for question 5.

I hope that helps!