Last visit was: 25 Apr 2024, 18:41 It is currently 25 Apr 2024, 18:41

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
SORT BY:
Date
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 13961
Own Kudos [?]: 32918 [1]
Given Kudos: 5778
GPA: 3.62
Send PM
Intern
Intern
Joined: 09 Jun 2019
Posts: 19
Own Kudos [?]: 1 [0]
Given Kudos: 136
Send PM
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 13961
Own Kudos [?]: 32918 [0]
Given Kudos: 5778
GPA: 3.62
Send PM
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 13961
Own Kudos [?]: 32918 [1]
Given Kudos: 5778
GPA: 3.62
Send PM
Re: Until recently, biologists were unable to explain the fact that pathog [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
Explanation


6. Which one of the following most accurately describes the organization of the passage?

Difficulty Level: Hard

Explanation

The simplest way to tackle this type of question is to compare the answer choices piece by piece to our Roadmap. Any choice that goes out of order, or that includes something outside the scope of the passage, is incorrect. All of the choices begin with, “introduction of a scientific anomaly,” so we’ll have to start eliminating choices based on the second and third phrases of the answer choices. At the end of this process, (A) will be the only one that remains:

(B) lasts through the first round of elimination, but skips from “presentation of an explanation for the anomaly” to “discussion of two examples.” The correct step for the beginning of paragraph 2 is “mention of an implication of the explanation,” which doesn’t appear in this choice until the very end. Eliminate.

(C) likewise is fine until we reach the third clause, but reverses the order of “discussion of two examples” and “mention of an implication.” Eliminate.

(D) and (E) both skip the end of paragraph 1: the “presentation of an explanation of the anomaly” that is present in the first three choices. Eliminate.

Answer: A
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 13961
Own Kudos [?]: 32918 [1]
Given Kudos: 5778
GPA: 3.62
Send PM
Re: Until recently, biologists were unable to explain the fact that pathog [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
Explanation


7. The passage implies that which one of the following is a reason that rhinoviruses are unlikely to be especially virulent?

Difficulty Level: Easy

Explanation

Rhinoviruses are the first example discussed in the passage, back in paragraph 2. Good for you if you skimmed this example the first time around; if this question weren’t on the test, an in-depth reading of this detail would have been a waste of time. Now we can dig deeper, confident that it will earn us a point. We learn from our research that a rhinovirus “requires physical proximity for transmission” (23–24), which means that it is “unlikely to disable its victims” (29–30). Let’s use those facts to evaluate the choices:

(A) is exactly what paragraph 2 tells us a rhinovirus doesn’t want to do, immobilize its host so quickly that it doesn’t have a chance to infect a new host. Eliminate.

(B), on the other hand, sounds pretty good. If rhinoviruses require physical proximity to latch on to a new host, then incapacitating their current host isn’t a good idea. (B) even matches up with lines 57–58, the only mention of rhinoviruses in the passage outside of paragraph 2, which refer to “an average rhinovirus life span of hours.” This choice is correct.

(C) and (D) both mention vectors, which are found in paragraph 3 and have nothing to do with rhinoviruses. Eliminate them both.

(E) is suggested by line 27, but is not given as a reason why rhinoviruses aren’t particularly virulent. Eliminate.

Answer: B
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 13961
Own Kudos [?]: 32918 [1]
Given Kudos: 5778
GPA: 3.62
Send PM
Until recently, biologists were unable to explain the fact that pathog [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
Explanation


8. The primary purpose of the passage is to

Difficulty Level: 650-700

Explanation

Once again, the author’s neutral point of view helps us eliminate answers quickly on Global questions. We originally predicted that the author’s Purpose was to explain or evaluate the new hypothesis, but since she didn’t offer an opinion on it, perhaps “describe” or something similarly neutral will be a better prephrase.

(A)’s “compare examples” focuses too much on the details of the passage. Even if you were tempted to read further, there are no examples “supporting” the prevailing view. Eliminate.

(B) and (D) offer “argue” and “attack,” respectively. Too harsh. Eliminate.

(C) “Offer” is sufficiently neutral, even if it wasn’t exactly what we originally predicted. And the “modification to the prevailing view” is clearly the new hypothesis that is the focus of the passage. This choice is correct. For the record:

(E)’s “examine” might be a good start, but “the origins of the prevailing view” really aren’t discussed in the passage, and they certainly aren’t its focus.

Answer: C
Manager
Manager
Joined: 16 Oct 2021
Posts: 149
Own Kudos [?]: 14 [0]
Given Kudos: 22
Location: Canada
Send PM
Re: Until recently, biologists were unable to explain the fact that pathog [#permalink]
Sajjad1994, can you please help with q5?

As per the passage, this is the view by biologists:

it could still achieve evolutionary success if its
replication led to a level of transmission into new
(15) hosts that exceeded the loss of pathogens resulting
from the host’s incapacitation.


How E is relevant? How we can imply about reproduction in the new host from statement above. (I have hard time to tie the loss of pathogens resulting from host's incapacitation, level of transmission into new host and transmission from incapacitated host into new host. To sum up, I don't see transmission from incapacitated host to new host in the statement above).

Summary: transmission into new hosts>loss of pathogens from the incapacitated host--> evolutionary success.
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Posts: 13961
Own Kudos [?]: 32918 [1]
Given Kudos: 5778
GPA: 3.62
Send PM
Re: Until recently, biologists were unable to explain the fact that pathog [#permalink]
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
Explanation


5. Which one of the following, if true, would most seriously challenge the position of the biologists mentioned in line 10?

Difficulty Level: 650

Explanation

As always, to weaken an argument we’ll find the evidence and conclusion, formulate the assumption, then try to find evidence that makes it less likely. The biologists in line 10 conclude that there’s a way for an incapacitating pathogen to “achieve evolutionary success” (line 13), namely “if its replication led to a level of transmission into new hosts that exceeded the loss of pathogens resulting from the host’s incapacitation (13–15).” In short, even nasty bugs can do well as long as they can get to new hosts in spite of their nastiness. This view assumes that getting to a new host is enough to “achieve evolutionary success.” We’ll have to look for a new piece of evidence that tells us otherwise.

(A) is a 180. If even pathogens that cause death usually achieve reproductive success, the biologists’ argument would be strengthened, not weakened. Eliminate.

(B) may have been tempting, but a pathogen could still be successful if it can’t overwhelm its new host. In fact, the prevailing view suggests that these newly underwhelming pathogens would even be more successful, since their hosts would be able to transmit them more widely. Eliminate.

(C) misses the point. The biologists in line 10 are concerned with pathogens that do incapacitate their hosts, not those that don’t. Eliminate.

(D) repeats information from lines 11–13. This choice merely tells us how pathogens make their hosts gravely ill, not how those same pathogens might (or might not) be successful in spite of causing illness. Eliminate.

(E) At last, something that weakens the biologists’ position. If the pathogens transmitted from incapacitated hosts can no longer reproduce, they will die off. That certainly doesn’t fit the definition of evolutionary success suggested by line 9: “long-term survival.” This choice is correct.

Answer: E
GMAT Club Bot
Re: Until recently, biologists were unable to explain the fact that pathog [#permalink]
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6921 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts
GRE Forum Moderator
13961 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne