Gardener: Researchers encourage us to allow certain kinds of weeds to

Question

Gardener: Researchers encourage us to allow certain kinds of weeds to grow among garden vegetables because they can repel caterpillars from the garden. While it is wise to avoid unnecessary use of insecticides, the researchers’ advice is premature. For all we know, those kinds of weeds can deplete the soil of nutrients and moisture that garden crops depend on, and might even attract other kinds of damaging pests.

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the gardener’s argument?

(A) To the extent that it is possible to do so, we should eliminate the use of insecticides in gardening.
(B) Allowing certain kinds of weeds to grow in vegetable gardens may contribute to a net increase in unwanted garden pests.
(C) Allowing the right kinds of weeds to grow in vegetable gardens can help toward controlling caterpillars without the use of insecticides.
(D) We should be cautious about the practice of allowing certain kinds of weeds to grow among garden vegetables.
(E) We should be skeptical about the extent to which certain kinds of weeds can reduce the presence of caterpillars in gardens.

PearlRay · Accepted Answer

I think everyone who answered this question was down to B and D...however..B just addresses the partial thought of the gardener-Main conclusion should sumarize both his apprehensions (Depletion of nutrients and water as well as other pests)

pyaasa · Answer

GMATNinja  
what is the problem with B?

Posted from my mobile device

himadeepm · Answer

B says that there is a net increase in pests.However,in the lsn't line of the argument it was mentioned that there might be a chance that 
other insects would be attracted.The net gain isn't mentioned
However, we should on the main conclusion(the move is premature).Option D, perfectly summarizes that .
Hope this cleared the doubt

Rishab130612 · Answer

What is the problem with C??
 It seems pretty straightforward. I am unable to comprehend what s wrong here.

peanuts · Answer

Gardener: Researchers encourage us to allow certain kinds of weeds to grow among garden vegetables because they can repel caterpillars from the garden. While it is wise to avoid unnecessary use of insecticides, the researchers’ advice is premature. For all we know, those kinds of weeds can deplete the soil of nutrients and moisture that garden crops depend on, and might even attract other kinds of damaging pests.
 
Conclusion: advice is premature
What is the advice? Allow certain kinds of weeds to grow in garden

Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main conclusion of the gardener’s argument?

(A) To the extent that it is possible to do so, we should eliminate the use of insecticides in gardening.  not the main concern

(B) Allowing certain kinds of weeds to grow in vegetable gardens may contribute to a net increase in unwanted garden pests.  not the main concern

(C) Allowing the right kinds of weeds to grow in vegetable gardens can help toward controlling caterpillars without the use of insecticides.  only the reason for the advice

(D) We should be cautious about the practice of allowing certain kinds of weeds to grow among garden vegetables.  correct

(E) We should be skeptical about the extent to which certain kinds of weeds can reduce the presence of caterpillars in gardens.  doubt about the reason for the advice

egmat · Answer

Hi Rishab130612,

Great question. Your confusion is very common here because C sounds like a true statement from the passage. But the question asks for the GARDENER's main conclusion, not just any true claim mentioned in the passage.

Let's look at who is saying what:

- The RESEARCHERS say: Certain weeds can repel caterpillars from the garden.
- The GARDENER says: That advice is premature.

Choice C — 'Allowing the right kinds of weeds to grow in vegetable gardens can help toward controlling caterpillars without the use of insecticides' — is essentially restating the RESEARCHERS' position. The gardener actually mentions this only to set it up as something to push back against.

This is a common trap: picking an answer that is true in the passage but belongs to the opposing side's argument.

Now look at the gardener's actual argument structure: 
 1.  Researchers say weeds can repel caterpillars. (Background/opponent's view)
 2.  Avoiding insecticides is wise. (Concession)
 3.  BUT the advice is premature. ( MAIN CONCLUSION )
 4.  Why? The weeds might deplete soil nutrients, reduce moisture, or attract other pests. (Supporting premises)

The word  "premature"  is the gardener's judgment — it means 'we shouldn't rush into this.' That maps directly to  D :  'We should be cautious about the practice.'

So C is something the gardener acknowledges but doesn't endorse. It's actually the opposing side's claim.  D  captures what the gardener is actually arguing for.

Key takeaway:  In main conclusion questions, always ask WHO is making the claim. A premise borrowed from an opponent's argument is never the author's conclusion.

Answer: D

Gardener: Researchers encourage us to allow certain kinds of weeds to

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

Gardener: Researchers encourage us to allow certain kinds of weeds to

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