Events & Promotions
|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2301:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Struggling with GMAT Verbal as a non-native speaker? Harsh improved his score from 595 to 695 in just 45 days—and scored a 99 %ile in Verbal (V88)! Learn how smart strategy, clarity, and guided prep helped him gain 100 points.
Apr 2308:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Apr 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
29 Dec 2025, 01:00
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
65%
(hard)
Question Stats:
57% (02:06) correct
43%
(02:18)
wrong
based on 167
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
The Happy Valley region of Pennsylvania has seen large scale encroachment by humans into its forested areas. Resultantly, native bird populations have dropped, as fruit bearing trees that the birds relied on were decimated. To rectify the situation, conservationists introduced the honeysuckle, a hardy fruit bearing non-native plant, into the region, in 2005, revitalizing bird populations by up to fifty percent in some areas. However, in 2010, the bird populations decreased sharply again.
Which of the following statements, if true, would best explain the 2010 decrease in bird populations?
A. Sharp increases in bird populations tend to deplete resources, such as nesting areas, that the birds need to sustain the population growth.
B. Non-native plants are often more productive than native plants because the non-native ones are safe from their pests and diseases, which have been left behind in their native lands.
C. Between 2005 and 2010, funding for several initiatives for bird conservation in the Happy Valley region of Pennsylvania gradually decreased as the bird populations recovered.
D. The honeysuckle population in the Happy Valley region of Pennsylvania remained roughly consistent between 2005 and 2010.
E. Before 2005, other species of fruit bearing plants served as a food source for the native birds of the region, but not as well as the honeysuckle did.
Which of the following statements, if true, would best explain the 2010 decrease in bird populations?
A. Sharp increases in bird populations tend to deplete resources, such as nesting areas, that the birds need to sustain the population growth.
B. Non-native plants are often more productive than native plants because the non-native ones are safe from their pests and diseases, which have been left behind in their native lands.
C. Between 2005 and 2010, funding for several initiatives for bird conservation in the Happy Valley region of Pennsylvania gradually decreased as the bird populations recovered.
D. The honeysuckle population in the Happy Valley region of Pennsylvania remained roughly consistent between 2005 and 2010.
E. Before 2005, other species of fruit bearing plants served as a food source for the native birds of the region, but not as well as the honeysuckle did.
02 Jan 2026, 15:02
Kudos
Bookmarks
Let's say that 100 Honeysuckles (HS) were planted in 2005. We did saw the result increase inn population of the bird, up to 50% level in some areas, in sort, the solution is working. But what happened between 2005 - 2010, that this solution backfired or some 3rd factor played a role?
Let's look for the answer for our question now.
Hmmmm, so our solution of planting HS did'nt backfired, but the rapid growing population of birds itself backfired and hence we hot our answer.
B. Non-native plants are often more productive than native plants because the non-native ones are safe from their pests and diseases, which have been left behind in their native lands.
This choice strengthen our solution of HS plant, but does nothing to answer our question. Hence, the paradox stays still.
C. Between 2005 and 2010, funding for several initiatives for bird conservation in the Happy Valley region of Pennsylvania gradually decreased as the bird populations recovered.
So the funding stopped, meaning no more than 100 HS were planted. This could have slowed the revival of the population these birds. But, this doesn't answer our question of sharp decrease in population of birds again during 2010. Hence, the paradox is not solved.
D. The honeysuckle population in the Happy Valley region of Pennsylvania remained roughly consistent between 2005 and 2010.
Same as C
E. Before 2005, other species of fruit bearing plants served as a food source for the native birds of the region, but not as well as the honeysuckle did.
If anything, this choice suggests that HS solution will do nothing but provide more sources of food available for the native birds to grow upon. Hence, this doesn't solve our paradox.
Hope it helps,
Thanks
Let's look for the answer for our question now.
ExpertsGlobal5
A. Sharp increases in bird populations tend to deplete resources, such as nesting areas, that the birds need to sustain the population growth.
Hmmmm, so our solution of planting HS did'nt backfired, but the rapid growing population of birds itself backfired and hence we hot our answer.
B. Non-native plants are often more productive than native plants because the non-native ones are safe from their pests and diseases, which have been left behind in their native lands.
This choice strengthen our solution of HS plant, but does nothing to answer our question. Hence, the paradox stays still.
C. Between 2005 and 2010, funding for several initiatives for bird conservation in the Happy Valley region of Pennsylvania gradually decreased as the bird populations recovered.
So the funding stopped, meaning no more than 100 HS were planted. This could have slowed the revival of the population these birds. But, this doesn't answer our question of sharp decrease in population of birds again during 2010. Hence, the paradox is not solved.
D. The honeysuckle population in the Happy Valley region of Pennsylvania remained roughly consistent between 2005 and 2010.
Same as C
E. Before 2005, other species of fruit bearing plants served as a food source for the native birds of the region, but not as well as the honeysuckle did.
If anything, this choice suggests that HS solution will do nothing but provide more sources of food available for the native birds to grow upon. Hence, this doesn't solve our paradox.
Hope it helps,
Thanks
04 Jan 2026, 02:45
Kudos
Bookmarks
ExpertsGlobal5
Explanation:
