Last visit was: 21 Apr 2026, 01:58 It is currently 21 Apr 2026, 01:58
Close
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.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 21 Apr 2026
Posts: 109,715
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 105,795
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 109,715
Kudos: 810,340
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 21 Apr 2026
Posts: 109,715
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 105,795
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 109,715
Kudos: 810,340
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
lkj123
Joined: 17 Jul 2025
Last visit: 06 Apr 2026
Posts: 33
Own Kudos:
19
 [1]
Posts: 33
Kudos: 19
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
dolortempore
Joined: 15 Aug 2025
Last visit: 22 Jan 2026
Posts: 47
Own Kudos:
44
 [1]
Given Kudos: 9
Posts: 47
Kudos: 44
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
So the above argument is a comparison between pre historic tetrapod vs modern salamander.

Since there was a quite a similarity between both of these, but the argument is focused on the factors that could play a important role in regeneration of limbs.
So it is evident that we are focused on option that is discussing about the time it took for regeration of limbs for pre historic tetrapod.

A) We are not focus on which one is faster to escape from predator hence eliminate
B) we are not focused on size of limbs they are growing hence eliminate
c) yes this is talking about the regeneration time so yes keep it
D) we are not discussing about the risk of prey hence eliminate
E) Same as D. hence eliminate

So answer is (C)
User avatar
manan01
Joined: 18 Jan 2024
Last visit: 20 Apr 2026
Posts: 36
Own Kudos:
15
 [1]
Given Kudos: 63
Location: India
Concentration: Strategy, Entrepreneurship
GMAT Focus 1: 585 Q80 V79 DI78
GPA: 9.4
GMAT Focus 1: 585 Q80 V79 DI78
Posts: 36
Kudos: 15
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
All the premises in the argument point towards the fact that pre historic tetrapod must've taken longer compared to mordern salamander's regrowth of limbs, because the environment in the mordern setting favour compared to pre historic times, along with that the limbs of tetrapod were also larger, but their physiology was same giving common grounds to compare hence imo, C
User avatar
Brindac2
Joined: 14 Apr 2025
Last visit: 20 Apr 2026
Posts: 26
Own Kudos:
16
 [1]
Given Kudos: 110
Location: United Arab Emirates
Concentration: Finance, Technology
GMAT Focus 1: 535 Q72 V82 DI75
WE:Management Consulting (Accounting)
GMAT Focus 1: 535 Q72 V82 DI75
Posts: 26
Kudos: 16
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A. No reference of effectiveness from the escape of strongest predators in paragraph. Nope
B. Limbs are larger in size in comparison with salamander, not with original limbs. Nope
C. Yes, right answer. Limbs will take more time to grow as they require more nutrients and faster cell deaths due to environmental factors.
D. Irrelevant to the paragraph.
E. Yeah, sure, there are other ways but we are only concerned with severing limbs right now. Nope.


Bunuel
The prehistoric tetrapod could sever its limbs to escape predators and then regrow the limbs afterwards, just as the modern salamander does. A salamander can regrow a lost limb in three to four weeks. However, although the physiology of the prehistoric tetrapod was similar to that of the modern salamander, the prehistoric tetrapod was proportionally larger, meaning it needed more nutrients to rebuild body mass. Further, the oxygen-rich atmosphere of the prehistoric tetrapod’s era led to faster cell-death, slowing the growth of new tissue.

The information given, if accurate, provides the strongest support for which of the following hypotheses?

A. If the prehistoric tetrapod regenerated their limbs faster than the modern salamander does, it would have been more effective at escaping even its strongest predators.

B. After the prehistoric tetrapod severed its limbs to escape predators, the new limbs it grew were usually proportionally larger than the originals were.

C. The limbs of the prehistoric tetrapod, if severed in an attempt to escape a predator, would have taken more time than the limbs of the modern salamander to regenerate.

D. The prehistoric tetrapod was at a much greater risk of falling prey to a predator than the modern salamander is.

E. Severing its limbs was not the only means the prehistoric tetrapod had for evading predators.

Gift
12 Days of Christmas Competition
This question is part of our holiday event
Win $40,000 in prizes: courses, tests, and more


 


This question was provided by Experts'Global
for the 12 Days of Christmas Competition

Win $40,000 in prizes: Courses, Tests & more

 

User avatar
Archit3110
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2017
Last visit: 20 Apr 2026
Posts: 8,625
Own Kudos:
5,190
 [1]
Given Kudos: 243
Status:You learn more from failure than from success.
Location: India
Concentration: Sustainability, Marketing
GMAT Focus 1: 545 Q79 V79 DI73
GMAT Focus 2: 645 Q83 V82 DI81
GPA: 4
WE:Marketing (Energy)
Products:
GMAT Focus 2: 645 Q83 V82 DI81
Posts: 8,625
Kudos: 5,190
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The prehistoric tetrapod could sever its limbs to escape predators and then regrow the limbs afterwards, just as the modern salamander does. A salamander can regrow a lost limb in three to four weeks. However, although the physiology of the prehistoric tetrapod was similar to that of the modern salamander, the prehistoric tetrapod was proportionally larger, meaning it needed more nutrients to rebuild body mass. Further, the oxygen-rich atmosphere of the prehistoric tetrapod’s era led to faster cell-death, slowing the growth of new tissue.



PH Tetrapod could sever its limbs and regrow , modern salamander can also do the same in 3 to 4 weeks time..
PH tetrapod was larger and there was oxygen rich atmosphere led to faster cell death and slow growth of new tissue...


The information given, if accurate, provides the strongest support for which of the following hypotheses?

A. If the prehistoric tetrapod regenerated their limbs faster than the modern salamander does, it would have been more effective at escaping even its strongest predators.

there is no direct relation b/w regeneration and effectiveness in escaping predators

B. After the prehistoric tetrapod severed its limbs to escape predators, the new limbs it grew were usually proportionally larger than the originals were.

this cannot be derieved from the given argument..


C. The limbs of the prehistoric tetrapod, if severed in an attempt to escape a predator, would have taken more time than the limbs of the modern salamander to regenerate.
yes , this is true to fact stated in the argument and correct option


D. The prehistoric tetrapod was at a much greater risk of falling prey to a predator than the modern salamander is.

there is no such information given in the premise..

E. Severing its limbs was not the only means the prehistoric tetrapod had for evading predators.
in correct option as the same cannot be said from the given argument ..

OPTION C is correct
User avatar
SwethaReddyL
Joined: 28 Nov 2023
Last visit: 21 Apr 2026
Posts: 106
Own Kudos:
26
 [1]
Given Kudos: 266
Location: India
Products:
Posts: 106
Kudos: 26
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I am not sure why this question is tagged under strengthen the argument; it is clearly an inference question type. Bunuel, correct me if I am wrong please

Option A - we don't that if it would escape it's strongest predators if it regenerated limbs faster - eliminate
Option B - again, we don't know if this is true - eliminate
Option C - this is perfect, goes align with the premise - hold on
Option D - greater risk? not sure - eliminate
Option E - it could be the only means or not - this is not in the scope - eliminate

It's a clear C for me
Bunuel
The prehistoric tetrapod could sever its limbs to escape predators and then regrow the limbs afterwards, just as the modern salamander does. A salamander can regrow a lost limb in three to four weeks. However, although the physiology of the prehistoric tetrapod was similar to that of the modern salamander, the prehistoric tetrapod was proportionally larger, meaning it needed more nutrients to rebuild body mass. Further, the oxygen-rich atmosphere of the prehistoric tetrapod’s era led to faster cell-death, slowing the growth of new tissue.

The information given, if accurate, provides the strongest support for which of the following hypotheses?

A. If the prehistoric tetrapod regenerated their limbs faster than the modern salamander does, it would have been more effective at escaping even its strongest predators.

B. After the prehistoric tetrapod severed its limbs to escape predators, the new limbs it grew were usually proportionally larger than the originals were.

C. The limbs of the prehistoric tetrapod, if severed in an attempt to escape a predator, would have taken more time than the limbs of the modern salamander to regenerate.

D. The prehistoric tetrapod was at a much greater risk of falling prey to a predator than the modern salamander is.

E. Severing its limbs was not the only means the prehistoric tetrapod had for evading predators.

Gift
12 Days of Christmas Competition
This question is part of our holiday event
Win $40,000 in prizes: courses, tests, and more


 


This question was provided by Experts'Global
for the 12 Days of Christmas Competition

Win $40,000 in prizes: Courses, Tests & more

 

User avatar
Ayeka
Joined: 26 May 2024
Last visit: 20 Apr 2026
Posts: 528
Own Kudos:
402
 [1]
Given Kudos: 158
Location: India
Schools: ISB
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q82 V83 DI80
GPA: 4.2
Schools: ISB
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q82 V83 DI80
Posts: 528
Kudos: 402
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A. The passage says that prehistoric tetrapod was larger and needed more nutrients to rebuild body mass........No
B. Nothing about what kind of limbs it grew is told, it only said that it is larger and nothing about limbs that regrew..........No
C. It says prehistoric tetrapod has larger mass and it needed more nutrients to regrow mass nd considering other conditions it can be directly inferred that tetrapod would taken more time than modern salamander.........Answer
D. Enough information to infer this is not provided........No
E. The argument is only about severing limbs and regrowing and comparison to modern salamander, nothing about other means of evading is discussed.......No

C
avatar
ManifestDreamMBA
Joined: 17 Sep 2024
Last visit: 21 Feb 2026
Posts: 1,387
Own Kudos:
897
 [1]
Given Kudos: 243
Posts: 1,387
Kudos: 897
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Inference?

A - There is no relation b/w limp regenration and predator escape effectiveness
B - There is no information provided to compare the size of limbs before and after regeneration
C - Given the tetrapod were larger, needed more nutrients and has oxygen countering the faster cell growth, it seems true the regeneration is slower than modern salamander
D - Risk of being preyed upon isn't discussed
E - There's no info to tell if this was the only means or there were other means too, to escape predators
Bunuel
The prehistoric tetrapod could sever its limbs to escape predators and then regrow the limbs afterwards, just as the modern salamander does. A salamander can regrow a lost limb in three to four weeks. However, although the physiology of the prehistoric tetrapod was similar to that of the modern salamander, the prehistoric tetrapod was proportionally larger, meaning it needed more nutrients to rebuild body mass. Further, the oxygen-rich atmosphere of the prehistoric tetrapod’s era led to faster cell-death, slowing the growth of new tissue.

The information given, if accurate, provides the strongest support for which of the following hypotheses?

A. If the prehistoric tetrapod regenerated their limbs faster than the modern salamander does, it would have been more effective at escaping even its strongest predators.

B. After the prehistoric tetrapod severed its limbs to escape predators, the new limbs it grew were usually proportionally larger than the originals were.

C. The limbs of the prehistoric tetrapod, if severed in an attempt to escape a predator, would have taken more time than the limbs of the modern salamander to regenerate.

D. The prehistoric tetrapod was at a much greater risk of falling prey to a predator than the modern salamander is.

E. Severing its limbs was not the only means the prehistoric tetrapod had for evading predators.

Gift
12 Days of Christmas Competition
This question is part of our holiday event
Win $40,000 in prizes: courses, tests, and more


 


This question was provided by Experts'Global
for the 12 Days of Christmas Competition

Win $40,000 in prizes: Courses, Tests & more

 

User avatar
adityamntr
Joined: 15 Jul 2023
Last visit: 21 Feb 2026
Posts: 111
Own Kudos:
81
 [1]
Given Kudos: 13
Location: India
Concentration: General Management, Strategy
Posts: 111
Kudos: 81
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
The prehistoric tetrapod could sever its limbs to escape predators and then regrow the limbs afterwards, just as the modern salamander does. A salamander can regrow a lost limb in three to four weeks. However, although the physiology of the prehistoric tetrapod was similar to that of the modern salamander, the prehistoric tetrapod was proportionally larger, meaning it needed more nutrients to rebuild body mass. Further, the oxygen-rich atmosphere of the prehistoric tetrapod’s era led to faster cell-death, slowing the growth of new tissue.

The information given, if accurate, provides the strongest support for which of the following hypotheses?

A. If the prehistoric tetrapod regenerated their limbs faster than the modern salamander does, it would have been more effective at escaping even its strongest predators.

B. After the prehistoric tetrapod severed its limbs to escape predators, the new limbs it grew were usually proportionally larger than the originals were.

C. The limbs of the prehistoric tetrapod, if severed in an attempt to escape a predator, would have taken more time than the limbs of the modern salamander to regenerate.

D. The prehistoric tetrapod was at a much greater risk of falling prey to a predator than the modern salamander is.

E. Severing its limbs was not the only means the prehistoric tetrapod had for evading predators.

Gift
12 Days of Christmas Competition
This question is part of our holiday event
Win $40,000 in prizes: courses, tests, and more


 


This question was provided by Experts'Global
for the 12 Days of Christmas Competition

Win $40,000 in prizes: Courses, Tests & more

 

A)not relevant to the arguement
B) not enough info provede
C)make sense by providing support, since tetrapod had to build more mass
D) not relavant to arguement
E)not enough info
User avatar
sitrem
Joined: 19 Nov 2025
Last visit: 24 Feb 2026
Posts: 91
Own Kudos:
84
 [1]
Given Kudos: 238
Posts: 91
Kudos: 84
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Answer C
This option is coherent with what is written in the text, which all seems to suggest that the regeneration would take longer (therefore be slower) than a salamander's.

A is incorrect because it says that the prehistoric animal will regenerate faster than a salamander, but the text says the opposite.
B is incorrect because the fact that the new lambs might be larger than the originals is never mentioned in the text.
D is incorrect because this information is irrelevant to the regeneration speed, which is what the text is about.
E is incorrect, for the same reason as D.
User avatar
batman10bigman
Joined: 23 Apr 2025
Last visit: 20 Apr 2026
Posts: 44
Own Kudos:
38
 [1]
Given Kudos: 11
Products:
Posts: 44
Kudos: 38
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Lets look at the options:
A: Talks about "regenerate faster" and "more effective at escaping", but the passage never compares faster regeneration or predator effectiveness. Incorrect
B: Claims the new limbs were "proportionally larger" which is not mentioned or implied anywhere. Incorrect
C: This is right cause the tetrapod needed more nutrients and had slower growth in its oxygen rich era, so its limbs would logically take longer to regenerate than a salamanders
D: Concludes overall predator risk was greater, but the passage only addressed regeneration speed. Incorrect
E: Asserts other escape methods existed, which is completely outside information given. Incorrect

Option C
Bunuel
The prehistoric tetrapod could sever its limbs to escape predators and then regrow the limbs afterwards, just as the modern salamander does. A salamander can regrow a lost limb in three to four weeks. However, although the physiology of the prehistoric tetrapod was similar to that of the modern salamander, the prehistoric tetrapod was proportionally larger, meaning it needed more nutrients to rebuild body mass. Further, the oxygen-rich atmosphere of the prehistoric tetrapod’s era led to faster cell-death, slowing the growth of new tissue.

The information given, if accurate, provides the strongest support for which of the following hypotheses?

A. If the prehistoric tetrapod regenerated their limbs faster than the modern salamander does, it would have been more effective at escaping even its strongest predators.

B. After the prehistoric tetrapod severed its limbs to escape predators, the new limbs it grew were usually proportionally larger than the originals were.

C. The limbs of the prehistoric tetrapod, if severed in an attempt to escape a predator, would have taken more time than the limbs of the modern salamander to regenerate.

D. The prehistoric tetrapod was at a much greater risk of falling prey to a predator than the modern salamander is.

E. Severing its limbs was not the only means the prehistoric tetrapod had for evading predators.

Gift
12 Days of Christmas Competition
This question is part of our holiday event
Win $40,000 in prizes: courses, tests, and more


 


This question was provided by Experts'Global
for the 12 Days of Christmas Competition

Win $40,000 in prizes: Courses, Tests & more

 

User avatar
forestmayank
Joined: 05 Nov 2025
Last visit: 31 Mar 2026
Posts: 103
Own Kudos:
87
 [1]
Given Kudos: 6
Posts: 103
Kudos: 87
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Given info:
Prehistoric tetrapod were larger. They severed their limbs to escape predators.
Severed limbs were larger and oxygen rich prehistoric environment resulted in faster cell death meaning longer time to regrow lost limbs.
Modern salamanders do the same but faster.

Option C says - Lost limbs of prehistoric tetrapod would have taken more time to regrow than modern salamanders which is consistent with the given information.

Hence, answer is Option C.
User avatar
AviNFC
Joined: 31 May 2023
Last visit: 10 Apr 2026
Posts: 306
Own Kudos:
366
 [1]
Given Kudos: 5
Posts: 306
Kudos: 366
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
A. If the prehistoric tetrapod regenerated their limbs faster than the modern salamander does, it would have been more effective at escaping even its strongest predators. Effectiveness of escaping predators is outside info.

B. After the prehistoric tetrapod severed its limbs to escape predators, the new limbs it grew were usually proportionally larger than the originals were. Passage says new limb is generated but does not give info about the new limb.

C. The limbs of the prehistoric tetrapod, if severed in an attempt to escape a predator, would have taken more time than the limbs of the modern salamander to regenerate. Correct. cell death slows down the process of regeneration & additional nutrient will also take more time.

D. The prehistoric tetrapod was at a much greater risk of falling prey to a predator than the modern salamander is. New Information. Who was at a greater risk to predators has not been compared.

E. Severing its limbs was not the only means the prehistoric tetrapod had for evading predators. Other options have not been discussed.

Ans C
User avatar
Sumimasen
Joined: 21 Jan 2024
Last visit: 20 Apr 2026
Posts: 36
Own Kudos:
33
 [1]
Given Kudos: 11
Products:
Posts: 36
Kudos: 33
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
In short argument is saying that a prehistoric tetrapod, like modern salamanders, could sever its limbs and regrow afterwards to escape predators. But its larger size needed more nutrients to rebuild mass and oxygen-rich atmosphere of its era would have slowed limb regeneration compared to modern salamanders.

A. Speculation. Not inferred from above information.
B. No evidence provided in the argument for this choice.
C. Correct. Aligned with above simple short explanation.
D. Not supported from the argument about greater risk of falling prey to predator because of slower limb regeneration.
E. Out of scope.
User avatar
pappal
Joined: 24 Nov 2022
Last visit: 17 Apr 2026
Posts: 314
Own Kudos:
109
 [1]
Given Kudos: 94
Products:
Posts: 314
Kudos: 109
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
here we need to access the conclusion of the argument based on the given premises?
the given argument compares the severing of limbs of prehistoric tetrapod and salamander to evade predators. Salamander limbs restore in 3-4 weeks. In the rest argument it focusses on the restrictions, such as large limbs size, more food requirement and fast decay of cells, pointing towards the delay in the restoration of limbs in the prehistoric reptile. Hence conclusion to follow should be the choice which compares the severing process restoration time of the two reptiles.
a. if regeneration of limbs in prehistoric reptile is faster than salamander, more effective evasion. completely out of context
b. says regenerated limbs would be larger---not related to argument
c. exact conclusion of the above argument as stated in bold face above--correct
d. no where the argument implies that prehistoric predator were at greater risk of falling prey to its modern counterpart.--out
e. nowhere the argument implies or discusses about any other means--out
so C
User avatar
obedear
Joined: 05 Sep 2024
Last visit: 20 Apr 2026
Posts: 61
Own Kudos:
39
 [1]
Given Kudos: 11
Products:
Posts: 61
Kudos: 39
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
I selected C relatively quickly.

The passage specifically mentions the regrowing time it takes for the modern salamander as 3-4 weeks, and is clearly drawing a parallel between the salamander and the tetrapod. It provides evidence to suggest that additional resources such as nutrients and time are needed to regrow the new tissue.

A - There is nothing within the passage to suggest any conclusion for the hypothetical if the rate of regeneration been faster for the tetrapod, something else can be concluded.

B - While it does suggest that the size of the tetrapod was larger than the salamander, there is nothing to suggest that the limbs of the tetrapod itself would be larger than its previous limbs.

C - Correct - this completes the thought begun in the argument stem.

D - The passage does not discuss likelihood to fall prey to a predator.

E - Not clear, the passage does not speculate on whether the tetrapod had additional means.
User avatar
rahumangal
Joined: 20 Nov 2022
Last visit: 07 Apr 2026
Posts: 71
Own Kudos:
66
 [1]
Given Kudos: 316
Location: India
Concentration: Finance, Real Estate
GPA: 3.99
WE:Engineering (Technology)
Products:
Posts: 71
Kudos: 66
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
The prehistoric tetrapod could sever its limbs to escape predators and then regrow the limbs afterwards, just as the modern salamander does. A salamander can regrow a lost limb in three to four weeks. However, although the physiology of the prehistoric tetrapod was similar to that of the modern salamander, the prehistoric tetrapod was proportionally larger, meaning it needed more nutrients to rebuild body mass. Further, the oxygen-rich atmosphere of the prehistoric tetrapod’s era led to faster cell-death, slowing the growth of new tissue.

The information given, if accurate, provides the strongest support for which of the following hypotheses?

A. If the prehistoric tetrapod regenerated their limbs faster than the modern salamander does, it would have been more effective at escaping even its strongest predators.

B. After the prehistoric tetrapod severed its limbs to escape predators, the new limbs it grew were usually proportionally larger than the originals were.

C. The limbs of the prehistoric tetrapod, if severed in an attempt to escape a predator, would have taken more time than the limbs of the modern salamander to regenerate.

D. The prehistoric tetrapod was at a much greater risk of falling prey to a predator than the modern salamander is.

E. Severing its limbs was not the only means the prehistoric tetrapod had for evading predators.

Gift
12 Days of Christmas Competition
This question is part of our holiday event
Win $40,000 in prizes: courses, tests, and more


 


This question was provided by Experts'Global
for the 12 Days of Christmas Competition

Win $40,000 in prizes: Courses, Tests & more

 

type of question- Must be true
Pre-thinking
The argument says that the prehistoric tetrapod was larger so needed more nutrient to build its severed limb and due to high oxygen content of atmosphere cell growth was slow. Both of which seems to indicate that the tetra pod need more time to grow its severed limbs back compared to modern day salamander . Our answer should be indicative of this or near about

A-Effectiveness of escaping is not discussed in the argument so we can't say anything related to that- OUT OF SCOPE

B-We don't know if re-grown limbs were larger or smaller than the original- Out

C- This is what we had in our pre-thinking- Correct

D-Whether tetrapod was at higher risk of being a prey is not known to use. The argument does say that it is larger in size than the salamander but that doesn't mean we can assume it was at a greater risk of being attacked, maybe it and some other ability that protected it better from other predators than the salamander -Out of scope

E-What other means of escape tetrapod had for escaping is none of our business- Out of scope
User avatar
Vamikaaa
Joined: 31 Oct 2025
Last visit: 04 Apr 2026
Posts: 17
Own Kudos:
9
 [1]
Given Kudos: 13
Posts: 17
Kudos: 9
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Ans = C

The prehistoric tetrapod could sever its limbs to escape predators and then regrow the limbs afterwards, just as the modern salamander does. A salamander can regrow a lost limb in three to four weeks. However, although the physiology of the prehistoric tetrapod was similar to that of the modern salamander, the prehistoric tetrapod was proportionally larger, meaning it needed more nutrients to rebuild body mass. Further, the oxygen-rich atmosphere of the prehistoric tetrapod’s era led to faster cell-death, slowing the growth of new tissue.

The information given, if accurate, provides the strongest support for which of the following hypotheses?

A. If the prehistoric tetrapod regenerated their limbs faster than the modern salamander does, it would have been more effective at escaping even its strongest predators.
Irrelevant/Unrelated - effectiveness of escaping is not discussed in given information

B. After the prehistoric tetrapod severed its limbs to escape predators, the new limbs it grew were usually proportionally larger than the originals were.
Irrelevant - side of limb not discussed

C. The limbs of the prehistoric tetrapod, if severed in an attempt to escape a predator, would have taken more time than the limbs of the modern salamander to regenerate.
Correct. This is the conclusion author is trying to get to

D. The prehistoric tetrapod was at a much greater risk of falling prey to a predator than the modern salamander is.
This information is not provided in the given paragraph

E. Severing its limbs was not the only means the prehistoric tetrapod had for evading predators.
Irrelevant - no mention of this in the given info
 1   2   3   
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7391 posts
494 posts
358 posts