First, my usual disclaimer: the GMAT spends between $1500 and $3000 developing every GMAT question, and even the best test-prep companies can't compete with that. Like many non-official questions, this one doesn't quite seem like the real thing to me.
That said... well, the OA isn't too bad in this case.
As others have pointed out, this question is mostly about parallelism. "Some sounds
were intended as a warning call, while others ______ or _______." Logically, whatever is in those two blanks needs to be parallel to "were intended." So we need a pair of verbs, and unless those verbs are in past tense, the sentence won't make any sense.
So (A) is gone, since the verbs are infinitives. (B) is gone, because "intimidating" clearly isn't parallel with "intended." (E) is just a mess: "others intended the... intimidating predators." So we're left with (C) and (D).
(C) is fine: "were intended" is just a verb, and so are "expressed" and "intimidated." That makes perfect sense: some sounds were intended as a warning call, some sounds expressed emotion, and some sounds intimidated predators. No problem here.
(D) is a little bit more subtle, but it's basically saying "some sounds were to express emotion" and "some sounds were to intimidate predators." I don't think that makes any sense unless we make it clear that the sounds were
intended to express emotion and intimidate predators.
But again: this probably isn't the most realistic question ever written.