Here's the
official explanation provided by the GMAC for this question:
This sentence describes two effects of the aurora borealis. It heats the atmosphere enough
to affect x and
(to) induce y; the preposition
to does not need to be repeated because it is understood. The conjunction
and is necessary to show that the two effects are equal and separate. When they are separated only by a comma, the second effect appears to be part of the first one, which is not true.
Option A: To affect and (
to understood)
induce should be joined by the conjunction
and rather than separated by a comma
Option B: The correct idiom is
can heat… enough to affect;
that violates the idiom and introduces an illogical sequence of verbs (
are affected, induce)
Option C: The correct idiom is
can heat… enough to affect;
that violates the idiom; the verbs should be joined by a conjunction rather than separated by a comma
Option D: That violates the correct idiom
can heat… enough to affect; the verbs illogically change tenses
Option E: Correct. In this sentence, the two effects are shown to be equal and separate in a grammatical construction that correctly joins
to affect and (
to understood)
induce.
The correct answer is E.
Please note that I'm not the author of this explanation. I'm just posting it here since I believe it can help the community.