Plant geneticists continue to modify and refine the DNA of

Question

Plant geneticists continue to modify and refine the DNA of agricultural products, altering genes that affect the abundance and taste of the crop. Eventually, the entire genome of every major food crop will be subject to such manipulation. Once these scientists have mastered the DNA of all major food crops, no obstacles to abundant, delicious vegetables and grains will remain.

The argument is based on which of the following assumptions?

A All obstacles to agricultural production are susceptible to genetic remedies.
B Obstacles to the agricultural production are susceptible only to genetic remedies.
C There is already a visible change in produce size at supermarkets, attributable to genetic manipulation of crops.
D Produce taste tests should be conducted to compare genetically modified produce and natural produce.
E Consumers have grown increasingly skeptical of the merits of genetically modified produce.

seekmba · Answer

The argument is talking about 2 obstacles: abundance and taste. How can 2 obstacles constitute as all obstacles susceptible to genetic remedies. I think thats a big leap in assumption.

magnetictempest · Answer

What tipped me off was this:
... no  obstacles to abundant, delicious vegetables and grains will remain....

A.  All  obstacles to agricultural production are susceptible to genetic remedies.

For no obstacles to remain, then the genetic remedies must be able to eliminate all possible ones.

rlevochkin · Answer

A. it is.

Let's neglect the assumption that all agricultural production issues can be solved genetically.

What if some problems with major ag crops cannot be solved genetically.
What if manipulation of abundance and taste are among those genetically unsolvable problems. 
Then we cannot be so sure that no obstacle to abundance and taste of all major crops will remain.

ingoditrust · Answer

A and B are contenders and all others are completely place for fun.

Between A and B, pick  A  as we want all obstacles to be susceptible to genetic modification.

@magnetictempest,

Very well pointed out.

agnok · Answer

Marcab · Answer

I don't think taht we should even discuss about CDE.
A and B are contender.
Lets try B first.
B says- Obstacles to the agricultural production are susceptible only to genetic remedies.  On negating, we come up with "Obstacles to the agricultural production are susceptible NOT only to genetic remedies". It implies that that there are other remedies also; consider that the other remedy be X.
Now if I say that obstacles to the agricultural production are susceptible to genetic remedies and X then how can we conclude that once these scientists have mastered the DNA, there would be no obstacles. May be that some obstacles are susceptible to only X.

Now try A-All obstacles to agricultural production are susceptible to genetic remedies.
The argument says that "once these scientists have mastered the DNA, there would be NO obstacles". So it is clear that A is the assumption here.
+1A

sunny91 · Answer

Confused between A and B
Negating B stands as- Obstacles to the agricultural production are not susceptible only to genetic remedies. So, there could be something else. So, even if the scientists have mastered the DNA of all major food crops, no obstacles to abundant, delicious vegetables and grains will remain dont hold true. Negation breaks the argument.

Negating A-All obstacles to agricultural production are not susceptible to genetic remedies. So, a few are susceptible to something else. Negating A breaks the argument.

sunny91 · Answer

Confused between A and B
Negating B stands as- Obstacles to the agricultural production are not susceptible only to genetic remedies. So, there could be something else. So, even if the scientists have mastered the DNA of all major food crops, no obstacles to abundant, delicious vegetables and grains will remain dont hold true. Negation breaks the argument.

Negating A-All obstacles to agricultural production are not susceptible to genetic remedies. So, a few are susceptible to something else. Negating A breaks the argument.

A_Nishith · Answer

Option A: All obstacles to agricultural production are susceptible to genetic remedies.
Explanation: This option is correct because the argument is assuming that once geneticists fully control the DNA of major food crops, all obstacles to abundance and taste will be removed. For that to be true, the argument must assume that all obstacles to agricultural production, whether related to growth, taste, or yield, can indeed be addressed by genetic modification.
Correct: This is the assumption underlying the conclusion.

Option B: Obstacles to agricultural production are susceptible only to genetic remedies.
Explanation: This option says that only genetic remedies can overcome the obstacles to agricultural production. However, the argument does not claim that other non-genetic remedies (e.g., improved farming techniques, fertilizers) would not work. The argument only focuses on genetic solutions but does not imply that they are the sole means of improvement.
Incorrect: This is too extreme and not necessary for the argument to hold.

Option C: There is already a visible change in produce size at supermarkets, attributable to genetic manipulation of crops.
Explanation: This statement brings in the idea of visible changes in produce size, which is unrelated to the core of the argument. The argument is about the potential for genetic manipulation to eventually overcome all obstacles to delicious, abundant crops, not about current results of genetic modifications.
Incorrect: This is irrelevant to the assumption behind the argument.

Option D: Produce taste tests should be conducted to compare genetically modified produce and natural produce.
Explanation: The argument makes no mention of needing to compare genetically modified produce with natural produce. It is not concerned with testing or comparing but is focused on the eventual outcome of genetic mastery.
Incorrect: This introduces a new idea unrelated to the assumption of the argument.

Option E: Consumers have grown increasingly skeptical of the merits of genetically modified produce.
Explanation: This introduces the idea of consumer skepticism, which is irrelevant to the assumption. The argument focuses on geneticists' ability to remove obstacles to crop abundance and taste, not on consumer attitudes.
Incorrect: This is unrelated to the assumption behind the argument.
 
Conclusion: Option A  is the correct answer. The argument assumes that all obstacles to agricultural production are susceptible to genetic remedies, making this a necessary assumption for the argument to hold true.

Plant geneticists continue to modify and refine the DNA of

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Plant geneticists continue to modify and refine the DNA of

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards