I didn't see this question analyzed well, so I thought I'd provide why I circled D.
Conclusion: Several ancient Greek texts provide accounts of i.) people being poisoned by honey and, then, ii.) suggesting that the honey was made from the nectar of rhododendron or oleander plants.
We need to look for an answer that, if true, provides additional support for these accounts. I personally thought the toughest part of this question was understanding the root question asked for supporting the Greek texts' overall account (so both people's being poisoned by honey and the honey likely deriving from rhododendron or oleander plants.
A. Even if there are other plants that produce more nectar, it's not clear from A that those other plants' nectar is poisonous. Thus, we can safely Eliminate.
B. I struggled with this one, so I left it on my answer choices. I disagree with the commenter above. This isn't a Weaken choice. This basically shows if a factor (
C. To me, this is a classic "can be interpreted in two different ways," which often reduces the likelihood of an answer being right. Let's say the honeycomb is 100% toxic, this would weaken the force of evidence that the honey is from these two plants vs. these plants' nectar. Let's say this answer choice suggests, conversely, that it can be implied that honeycombs are 100% non-toxic more often than not. This would strengthen the argument. Because it's unclear which direction this answer choice is taking us, we can safely eliminate C.
D. I left this answer. My biggest gripe here is it does say that, to be toxic, the honey must be eaten fresh as honey loses its toxicity within "a few weeks of being made." Notice how it says few weeks of "being made" vs. a few weeks of the plant bloom. This really bugged me, but I did have an intuitive feeling that this choice does fill a gap in the support. For now, I left that answer choice in the mix.
E. This provides a generalization on the fact that the plant itself provides the source of toxicity. This answer does not provide assurances though that it is the rhododendron or oleander plants themselves that cause the toxicity.
I then had it narrowed to B or D. For me personally, in reviewing the question, there also need to be additional evidence on the fact that it was honey that poisoned the people. B basically says honey is never poisonous in those areas but it doesn't add additional strength that people were poisoned from honey. Though I don't love that part I highlighted above in D, in thinking about the path of least resistance, this answer I thought likely got to the heart of what the author was trying to point out which is that honey is likely made around springtime from these nectars and, consequently, poisonings occurred around springtime (if not springtime, then early summer).
kingb
Several ancient Greek texts provide accounts of people being poisoned by honey that texts suggest was made from the nectar of rhododendron or oleander plants. Honey made from such nectar can cause the effects the texts describe, but only if eaten fresh, since the honey loses its toxicity within a few weeks of being made. In Greece, rhododendrons and oleander bloom only in springtime, when they are the predominant sources of nectar.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly support the accounts of Greek texts?
(A) There are no plants that Greece in ancient times that produce more nectar than rhododendrons or oleanders does.
(B) In areas where neither rhododendrons nor oleanders grow, honey is never poisonous
(C) A beehive's honeycomb cannot have some sections that contain toxic honey and other sections that contain nontoxic honey.
(D) The incidents of honey poisoning that are related in the ancient texts occurred in the springtime or in the early summer.
(E) Whether the honey in a beehive is toxic depends solely on which plants were the source of that was used to make the honey.