The wild Mouflon sheep of the island of Corsica are direct descendants

Question

The wild Mouflon sheep of the island of Corsica are direct descendants of sheep that escaped from domestication on the island 8,000 years ago. They therefore provide archaeologists with a picture of what some early domesticated sheep looked like, before the deliberate selective breeding that produced modern domesticated sheep began.

The argument above makes which of the following assumptions?

(A) The domesticated sheep of 8,000 years ago were quite dissimilar from the wild sheep of the time.

(B) There are no other existing breeds of sheep that escaped from domestication at about the same time as the forebears of the Mouflon.

(C) Modern domesticated sheep are direct descendants of sheep that were wild 8,000 years ago.

(D) Mouflon sheep are more similar to their forebears of 8,000 years ago than modern domesticated sheep are to theirs.

(E) The climate of Corsica has not changed at all in the last 8,000 years.

ChrisLele · Accepted Answer

The argument concludes the following: wild M. sheep provide a glimpse of what domesticated sheep 8,000 years ago looked like because these sheep have not been subjected to selective breeding. The assumption is that selective breeding changes the sheep and living out in the wild, as the M. sheep have done, does not make them different from the M. sheep of 8,000 years ago. Only (D) THE ANSWER addresses this assumption.

The argument above makes which of the following assumptions?

(A) The domesticated sheep of 8,000 years ago were quite dissimilar from the wild sheep of the time.

We only care about the wild M. sheep from today, not what the wild sheep were like 8,000 years ago.

(B) There are no other existing breeds of sheep that escaped from domestication at about the same time as the forebears of the mouflon.

Let's negate the assumption by omitting 'no' and see what happens. If there were other breeds of sheep that had escaped, then is the conclusion still valid? Notice the argument says 'some domestic sheep', meaning that the mouflon will give us an idea of how some of the old domesticated sheep looked, but not all of them. So even if a few other breeds escaped that wouldn't weaken this conclusion.

(C) Modern domesticated sheep are direct descendants of sheep that were wild 8,000 years ago.

The argument doesn't disagree with (C). It states that the sheep have changed over the years because of selective breeding.

(D) Mouflon sheep are more similar to their forebears of 8,000 years ago than modern domesticated sheep are to theirs. ANSWER

This is the assumption that ties the argument together. If M. sheep today are similar to the forebears from 8,000 years ago, then the conclusion is valid, i.e., we can gather what 8,000-year old sheep looked like.

(E) The climate of Corsica has not changed at all in the last 8,000 years.

The climate does not relate to this prompt. Do not bring in outside knowledge based on evolution: changes in climate and environemt leading to a change in the selective pressures in an organism.

Hope that helps

.

US09 · Answer

Hi,

The link is : Mouflon sheep are the descendant of sheep that escaped domestication 8000 years ago. So consider this - there was a set of domesticated sheep 8000 years ago, out of that set a certain variety escaped and the rest remained. The remained ones were performed breeding and other things on later with time but the one that were freed did not undergo any such procedures. And since M sheep are the descendant of that variety that escaped, they are more similar to those domesticated sheep 8000 years ago.

But what if even after undergoing selective breeding or other such processes, the left variety's present descendants are still more similar to their ancestors than M sheep? Who knows after getting free from domestication, those sheep underwent other major changes that changed them more than the selective breeding etc would have? Then, the conclusion breaks down. Hence, D.

vivmechster · Answer

Conclusion: Just because they look like some early domesticated sheep, It has been inferred that they are direct descendants.
Pre-thinking:
1. Picture is perfect to recognize the similarity.
2. there is a correlation between ancient and current sheep.

(A) The domesticated sheep of 8,000 years ago were quite dissimilar from the wild sheep of the time.< Focus on word DISSIMILAR - opposite of conclusion.>

(B) There are no other existing breeds of sheep that escaped from domestication at about the same time as the forebears of the Mouflon.<I am not concerned with other existing breed - elephants are also there, do i care, no>

(C) Modern domesticated sheep are direct descendants of sheep that were wild 8,000 years ago.<this uses similar terms but does focus on wildness of the sheep, and also no new info, assumption must have new info.>

(D) Mouflon sheep are more similar to their fore bears of 8,000 years ago than modern domesticated sheep are to theirs.<matches with my pre-thinking, so far, so good>

(E) The climate of Corsica has not changed at all in the last 8,000 years.<Yes climate has not changed. so, should i be happy, sad or do party?, trying to deceive me>

Hope this helps!

Mahmud6 · Answer

Choice D says

Mouflon sheep  MORE  || Forebears of 8,000 years ago

than

Modern domesticated sheep || Domesticated sheep of 8,000 years ago

So, since Mouflon sheep  MORE  || Forebears of 8,000 years ago, it can provide picture of how forebears of 8,000 years ago looked like. I don't understand how  Mouflon sheep  provides picture of how  domesticated  sheep of 8,000 years ago looked like. I don't see any link between Mouflon sheep and domesticated sheep of 8,000 years ago.

Your help will be appreciated by +1 Kudos.

tkorzhan1995 · Answer

GMATNinja , can you please explain why A is not correct?
MS is the descendant of ships that escaped domestication=wild ships. MS provides a picture of how domesticated ships looked like before the deliberate selective breeding began. I struggle to understand the linkage between being descendant of ships that escaped domestication, and providing archeologists with the picture of what early domesticated ships looked like.

GMATNinja · Answer

Let's start by figuring out the structure of the argument.

The argument concludes that wild Mouflon sheep "provide archaeologists with a picture of what some early domesticated sheep looked like, before the deliberate selective breeding that produced modern domesticated sheep began." This conclusion is supported by the fact that wild Mouflon sheep "are direct descendants of sheep that escaped from domestication on the island 8,000 years ago."

But how does this support the conclusion?

Well, today's Mouflon sheep are apparently descendants of  early domesticated sheep . That is, they are the descendants of sheep that "escaped from domestication."

Put another way -- 8,000 years ago, some sheep escaped from domestication. In other words, they were domesticated, but then they escaped. Their descendants are today's wild Mouflon sheep. So wild Mouflon sheep are descended from sheep which were domesticated 8,000 years ago, but then escaped.

Let's now consider (A):

An assumption is a statement that strengthens an argument and that is  necessary  to draw the conclusion. So how does (A) affect the argument?

Notice that the argument doesn't have anything to do with the  wild sheep of 8,000 years ago . Rather, we're trying to establish that today's wild Mouflon sheep are similar to the domesticated sheep that escaped 8,000 years ago. So (A) isn't relevant.

One side note -- notice the sheep which " escaped domestication " 8,000 years ago are different than the " wild sheep of the time " (i.e. the wild sheep from 8,000 years ago). Presumably, the "wild sheep of the time" were not domesticated at all, and never "escaped domestication." Rather, they were born wild.

Let's now consider (D):

Is this statement necessary to draw the conclusion?

Well, we're trying to conclude that Mouflon sheep "provide archaeologists with a picture of what some  early domesticated sheep  looked like, before the deliberate selective breeding that produced modern domesticated sheep began."

For this to make sense, Mouflon sheep would need to be similar to "early domesticated sheep." In fact, they'd need to be  more similar  to "early domesticated sheep" than "modern domesticated sheep" are. Otherwise, wild Mouflon sheep would NOT provide a picture of what early domesticated sheep looked like before selective breeding began.

From another angle -- what if (D) were NOT true? What if today's domesticated sheep  were  more similar to to early domesticated sheep than today's wild Mouflon sheep are?

Well, the argument would fall apart. Because in that case, modern domestic sheep would provide a better picture of early domestic sheep than wild Mouflon sheep would. And if that were the case, Mouflon sheep would NOT provide a picture of what "early domesticated sheep looked liked" before the selective breeding that produced modern sheep began. For that picture, we'd have to look at  today's domesticated sheep .

So because the statement is necessary for the argument to hold, it's an assumption and (D) correct.

I hope that helps!

tkorzhan1995 · Answer

GMATNinja , thank you for providing a detailed explanation. It seems like I made a mistake in this argument because I did not understand the definition of ships who escaped domestication. How do we know from the argument that ships who escaped domestication are not wild ships, but rather ships who were domesticated and then escaped?

GMATNinja · Answer

That's a good question -- how are we supposed to interpret the phrase "sheep that escaped from domestication?" If they "escaped from domestication," would that make them  wild  sheep? How are we supposed to know?

One way to approach that specific question is to analyze the phrase "escaped from domestication" more closely. Anything that "escaped from domestication" must have been domesticated at some point -- the same way anyone who "escaped from imprisonment" must have been imprisoned at some point. So whether the sheep who "escaped from domestication" should be considered wild at that point is no longer relevant. As long we know they were domesticated  at some point , we're in good shape to analyze the answers.

Another approach is to look at the larger context of the passage.

Notice that the second sentence tells us that wild Mouflon sheep "provide archaeologists with a picture of what some early domesticated sheep looked like..." And this conclusion is supported by the fact that wild Mouflon sheep are descendants of sheep that "escaped from domestication."

For this argument to make sense at all, those sheep that "escaped from domestication" must have been domesticated at some point. And that's why their descendants (wild Mouflon sheep) would resemble early domesticated sheep. So just by considering the logic of the passage, we see that sheep who "escaped from domestication" MUST have been domesticated at some point.

I hope that helps!

shanks2020 · Answer

GMATNinja

Can you please explain the bold sentences, how modern ships providing a  better  picture of early domestic sheep than wild mouflon leads to Mouflon sheep "NOT" providing a picture of early domesticated sheep?

GMATNinja · Answer

The argument concludes that wild Mouflon sheep "provide archaeologists with a picture of what some early domesticated sheep looked like, before the deliberate selective breeding that produced modern domesticated sheep began."

How does the author support this? They tell us that wild Mouflon sheep are direct descendants of earlier sheep that escaped domestication. So if the Mouflon sheep are similar to these earlier "forebears of 8,000 years ago," the conclusion would make sense.

Implicit in this argument is the idea that modern domesticated sheep  no longer  resemble early domesticated sheep. Because if they did, we could just look at modern domesticated sheep to see an example of early domesticated sheep. In other words, archaeologists would NOT have to look at wild Mouflon sheep for this example.

So how does (D) affect all this?

Notice the argument hinges on the idea that wild Mouflon sheep are not only similar to their forebears, but MORE similar than modern domesticated sheep are to theirs. Otherwise, modern domesticated sheep (NOT wild Mouflons) would provide an example of early domesticated sheep.

I hope that helps!

Kavicogsci · Answer

One of the best ways to avoid the pitfall is to be really precise on conclusion

They therefore provide archaeologists with a picture of what some early domesticated sheep looked like

What is conclusion? 
 IT IS HYPERSPECIFIC
 THEY -  Wild mouflon sheep. Not some other sheep. But Wild mouflon sheep
 PROVIDE PICTURE -  Wild mouflon sheep act as evidence
 OF -  Some early domesticated sheep looked like
 
What if someone else provided a better picture of what early domesticated sheep looked like? The conclusion will break! Because it clearly says that the way to understand what some early domesticated sheep looked like is best understood through wild mouflon sheep and not some random sheep.

D explains this exactly!

gullyboy09 · Answer

Hi  KarishmaB   GMATNinja   MartyMurray

In option D, even if modern descendants are more similar to their forebears, Mouflon could still resemble early sheep to give  a picture.  How conclusion falls here? If A is 30% similar to C, and B is 50% similar to C, then A can still give a picture of C. If conclusion would be about who best represent C, then it would have made sense. Given it's an official Q, I think I am doing some mistake but still not able to figure it out what, can you please help.

MartyMurray · Answer

The wild Mouflon sheep of the island of Corsica are direct descendants of sheep that escaped from domestication on the island 8,000 years ago. They therefore provide archaeologists with a picture of what some early domesticated sheep looked like, before the deliberate selective breeding that produced modern domesticated sheep began.

Conclusion of the argument:

They (the wild Mouflon sheep) therefore provide archaeologists with a picture of what some early domesticated sheep looked like, before the deliberate selective breeding that produced modern domesticated sheep began.

Support for the conclusion:

The wild Mouflon sheep of the island of Corsica are direct descendants of sheep that escaped from domestication on the island 8,000 years ago.

We see that the reasoning of the argument is the following: Since the wild Mouflon sheep have not been selectively bred since they escaped domestication 8,000 years ago, they provide a picture of what domesticated sheep looked like 8,000 years ago.

The argument above makes which of the following assumptions?

This is an Assumption question, and the correct answer will state something that must be true for the evidence provided to effectively support the conclusion.

(A) The domesticated sheep of 8,000 years ago were quite dissimilar from the wild sheep of the time.

To eliminate this choice, we need to notice the following.

The point of the argument is that we can tell what domestic sheep of 8,000 years ago looked like by looking at wild Mouflon sheep, which are descended from domesticated sheep of 8,000 years ago.

Simply put, we are looking at descendants of domesticated sheep to see what domesticated sheep look like.

So, what wild sheep looked like back then doesn't matter since wild sheep are not directly related to what the argument is concerned with.

After all, if Mouflon sheep look like domesticated sheep of 8,000 years ago, then Mouflon sheep provide a picture of what those domesticated sheep looked like regardless of what wild sheep looked like. Wild sheep could have looked exactly the same or completely different from domesticated sheep, and in any case, the looks of Mouflon sheep would indicate what domesticated sheep looked like.

So, the argument works regardless of whether this choice is true.

Eliminate.

(B) There are no other existing breeds of sheep that escaped from domestication at about the same time as the forebears of the Mouflon.

The conclusion is not that Mouflon sheep provide the  only  picture of what domesticated sheep of 8,000 years ago looked like. It's only that Mouflon sheep provide  a  picture of what domesticated sheep look like.

So, the argument works regardless of whether there are other sheep that could provide such a picture since archeologists could look at Mouflon sheep to get such a picture regardless of whether other sheep provide such a picture as well.

Eliminate.

(C) Modern domesticated sheep are direct descendants of sheep that were wild 8,000 years ago.

Regardless of whether modern domesticated sheep are descendants of sheep that were wild 8,000 years ago, Mouflon sheep are descendants of domesticated sheep.

So, regardless of whether this choice is true, it makes sense that Mouflon sheep provide a picture of what domesticated sheep of 8,000 years ago looked like.

Eliminate.

(D) Mouflon sheep are more similar to their forebears of 8,000 years ago than modern domesticated sheep are to theirs.

Seeing that this choice is correct requires presuming something from what the passage says.

The passage mentions the following:

a picture of what some early domesticated sheep looked like, before the deliberate selective breeding that produced modern domesticated sheep began

From that, we have to presume that, because of selective breeding, modern domesticated sheep do not look like the domesticated sheep of 8,000 years ago.

It's safe to presume that because, it must be true for the argument to make sense. After all, if modern domesticated sheep looked like the domesticated sheep of 8,000 years ago, then the idea of using Mouflon sheep to get a picture of the domesticated sheep of the past wouldn't make sense.

Given that presumption, the argument requires the assumption that "Mouflon sheep are more similar to their forebears of 8,000 years ago than modern domesticated sheep are to theirs."

After all, given that presumption, if Mouflon sheep are not more similar to their forebears than modern domesticated sheep are to theirs, then Mouflon sheep do not provide a picture of what domesticated sheep of 8,000 years ago looked like.

In other words, the argument assumes that, since Mouflon sheep have not been subject to "selective breeding," they look like sheep of 8,000 years ago.

So, for the evidence to effectively support the conclusion, it has to be true that Mouflon sheep ARE more similar to their forebears than modern domesticated sheep are to theirs since, presumably, modern domesticated sheep do not look like their forebears.

Keep.

(E) The climate of Corsica has not changed at all in the last 8,000 years.

We have to be careful not to mistakenly choose this choice by making up an unsupported story about the sheep having changed because the climate changed.

After all, this choice is about the climate, not the sheep.

It's true that, if the climate changed, the Mouflon sheep could have changed to fit the climate. At the same time, since we don't have a clear reason to believe that they have changed and since they may not have changed even if the climate has changed, the argument does not require the assumption that the climate has not changed.

Eliminate.

Correct answer:   D

The wild Mouflon sheep of the island of Corsica are direct descendants

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

The wild Mouflon sheep of the island of Corsica are direct descendants

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