Pesticides (including insecticides, fungicides, nematicides, and herbi

Most of the passage is about the level of cholinesterase and its impact on vertebrates. cholinesterase itself gets interfered by Organophosphates, which is a pesticide. So, I am wondering about your answer to second question. In my understanding the answer should be B --> "are detrimental to both insects and vertebrates"

1. In the passage, the author most likely mentions that population declines have occurred in seemingly pristine areas (line 36) in order to emphasize that:

In this RC, I think para 1 is setting up the context with theory; whereas para 2, 3 and 4 are explanation with certain examples.

So Line 36: Many amphibian population declines have occurred in some of the state's most seemingly pristine areas, such as the Sierra Nevada mountain range of eastern California which includes Sequoia, Yosemite, Kings Canyon, and Lassen Volcanic National Parks as well as Lake Tahoe and Mt. Whitney.

however, if we refer the context setting in para 1, it gives more background, as to why would author write line 36 at all. so for this, refer Line 4: However, pesticides by their very nature can result in serious harm to wildlife both by directly killing animals and through more subtle effects on reproduction, development and behavior

POE:
A. while there has been some damage to the environment of the Sierra Nevada, it is not irreparable. - "irreparable"- not mentioned anywhere
B. appropriate action should be taken to restore the Sierra Nevada to its former purity. - the line is not suggesting any action. out of scope
C. environmental damage and its causes may not be apparent to casual observers. - yes. line 4 says exactly this.
D. because some amphibian species are still abundant in the Sierra Nevada, casual observers do not realize how many are seriously threatened. - this is something similar to line 4, but restricting it to nevada makes it wrong choice.
E. the environmental damage caused by pesticides has been all pervasive - nope, inconsistent

2. With respect to pesticides, the author takes time in the passage to assert that they:

Now, the word "takes time" is something which is unusual question stem. it doesnt for sure tell me what is it looking for. So lets directly go to options and figure it out.

Option A, B, C are something that are mentioned or implied through the paragraph. Option E, is completely out of scope. Option D is the only one left. and if we were to think about it, the author mention this fact in 1st line that "pesticides are used to increase production by combating organisms that damage or destroy plants", but he doesn't build any context on this one. So "takes time" may fit in here.

A. are transported for long distances by wind currents.
B. are detrimental to both insects and vertebrates.
C. are not used in the Sierra Nevada.
D. have benefits in agricultural applications.
E. should be absolutely banned

3. The function of the third paragraph in relation to the passage as a whole is to:

3rd para starts with word "moreover", which reflect the continuation of the thought process from earlier para. In 2nd para, author is builindg up on the research results and mentioning facts from the research finding. in para 3, he is further adding finding and trying to draw conclusion basis location etc
POE

A. critique the scientific study alluded to in the first paragraph. - not critiquing, but deep diving
B. present evidence to support a hypothesis introduced in the first paragraph. - so the first para is context setting and remaining are providing context through study and other evidence from geos. so ya, sounds ok.
C. provide more details with respect to the geographical information introduced in the first paragraph. - 1st para doesn't specifically talk about geos.
D. provide more specific examples of the harmful effects of pesticides mentioned in the second paragraph. - yes it does, but it does more than this. it also is trying to put together the finidings of the research to get to a point.
E. present data to undermine a theory introduced in the first paragraph. - "undermine" - nope

How do people come up with a sub-600 label for an RC passage that has an average hit rate of around 25% on its questions?

Topic and Scope - Pesticides and the decline of California amphibian populations

Mapping the Passage

¶1 describes the mechanism of pesticide toxicity for the enzyme cholinesterase.
¶s2 and 3 describe experimental evidence suggesting that pesticides negatively affect
amphibian species and describe the decline in amphibian populations in various areas
of California.
¶4 suggests a mechanism by which pesticides would be transported through wind to
contaminate the Sierra Nevada.
Strategy Point:

Be sure to understand cause-and-effect relationships in Natural Science passages. A
simple flowchart that diagrams what the passage says can be an effective form of
mapping.

1) Review the lines in context. Why would the author want to make a point about
population declines in ―seemingly pristine‖ areas especially? Predict: Even though
the areas seem pristine, they might not in fact be so if amphibian populations are
declining; they might be contaminated by pesticides that simply aren‘t obvious. (C)
says the same.
(A): Out of Scope.
The author only discusses contamination; anything about repair
is outside the author‘s topic, and wouldn‘t have anything to do with the specific
mention of ―seemingly pristine‖ areas anyway.
(B): Out of Scope.
As above, the author never discusses whether or how to fix the
damage caused by pesticides.
(C): The correct answer
(D): Distortion.
Casual observers might not realize that there‘s pollution, but the
author never argues that amphibians are abundant
(E): This is not the idea as is clear from the above explanation

2) A detail question. Where are pesticides primarily mentioned? Focus your search on
¶s 1 and 4. (D) follows directly from the author‘s point in the first sentence of ¶1:
Pesticides are useful in attacking organisms that harm plants.
(A): Distortion.
Though the author says that pesticides might be transported ―on
the prevailing eastward summer winds,‖ there‘s no way to tell whether
they‘re in fact transported a long distance.
(B): Distortion.
The author states in ¶1 that organophosphates are harmful to both
insects and vertebrates, but doesn‘t assert this about pesticides in general, as
the question requires.
(C): Out of Scope.
While this sounds plausible, the author never discusses potential
pesticide use in the Sierra Nevada, only contamination from pesticides used
elsewhere.
(D): The correct answer
(E): Opposite as well as Extreme

3) An evaluation question; refer to your map. What is the author‘s purpose in writing
the third paragraph? Predict: The author wants to describe a mechanism by which
some pesticides can harm animal populations. The answer choices are abstract, so
compare them to your prediction piece-by-piece. (B) holds up: The mechanism of
action is evidence, and it supports the hypothesis in ¶3 that pesticides are in fact
hurting the frog population.
(A): Out of Scope.
While the author does allude to a scientific study in ¶3 by
mentioning that amphibian populations are declining (someone had to study
that), the author never critiques the study.
(B): The correct answer
(C): Out of Scope.
The author doesn‘t discuss any geographic information in ¶1.
(D): Distortion.
Though the author does provide examples of harmful effects in ¶1,
there are no harmful pesticide effects mentioned in ¶2; there‘s only the
suggestion of a link between pesticide use and amphibian population decline.
(E): Opposite as mentioned in ‗B‘ above

Q2. is absolutely ridiculous, there cannot be one single answer given the choices.

Need help with Q3. I chose D, I dont think any hypothesis was introduced in 1st para, so how come A is right ans.
Also Q2 is just out of my understanding. Pls help GMATNinja

Click the below link for Official Explanation

https://gmatclub.com/forum/pesticides-i ... l#p2365951

Cheers

The answer for 1st is clearly E and in question 2 the answer cannot be D at any cost . The author has taken time to say that the pesticides are bad overall .
The questions are of extremely poor quality and answers make absolutely no sense.­