Biologist: Conservation biologists working to prevent species

Question

Biologist: Conservation biologists working to prevent species extinction have long acknowledged that popular species such as lions, eagles, and pandas receive disproportionately large amounts of funding and public attention as compared to less-popular species such as invertebrates and amphibians. Indeed, many of these less-popular species are more in danger of extinction than the more popular species. Although many conservation biologists have accepted this pattern of disproportionate funding, I believe it needs to stop. For, despite the substantial and continuing expenditure of resources on the more-popular species, very few of these species have any chance of escaping extinction.

The biologist's reasoning is subject to the criticism that the claim that ____A____, which is used to justify the main point, undermines the support for the point that ____B____.

Select for A and for B the options such that criticism of the zoologist's reasoning is strongest. Make only two selections, one in each column.

Show Spoiler

ID: 700349

The biologist's reasoning is subject to the criticism that the claim that ____ A ____, which is used to justify the main point, undermines the support for the point that ____ B ____.

Select for  A  and for  B  the options such that criticism of the zoologist's reasoning is strongest. Make only two selections, one in each column.

ID: 700349

chetan2u · Accepted Answer

1. Biologist in the para above talks of few points/facts
 
 Conservation biologist (CB) have acknowledged disproportionate large amounts dedicated to try and prevent extinction of more popular species.(PI) 
 Biologist feels many of the less-popular species are more endangered that more-popular species........(PII)  
2. Thereafter, comes the conclusion of the reasoning of Biologist
 
 Many CB have accpeted this disproportionate funding for more-popular species, but the biologist himself feels it should stop(C)  
3. Finally, the last sentence speaks of something to support his view given above in conclusion.
 
 The word 'For' tells us that we are looking at a reason for the preceding statement. 
 The point is made that inspite of the huge funding, very few of the more-popular species have any chance of escaping extinction...(PIII)  
So, we have three points PI, PII and PIII and one main conclusion C. Even before we jump into the question, doesn't (PIII) seem to be contradicting (PII).

The biologist's reasoning is subject to the criticism that the claim that ____ A ____, which is used to justify the main point, undermines the support for the point that ____ B ____.

Now, the options A and B have to be related to five bullets on top.

A is a claim and is used to justify the main point(conclusion): the point 2 above gives the main point and 3 is supporting that main point ( The clue as written above is the word 'For'. Thus, (II) in point 3 should be the answer for blank A.
 E. very few of the more-popular species have any chance of escaping extinction

We have to be very careful with wordings  undermines  the support for the point  that ____ B ____ . 
First we look for what statement is being weakened by blank A, and then relate it to   what point   was being supported by   that statemen  t. Our answer for B is the   point   and not the   statement.  
The word 'undermines' tells us that we have to look for a point that is being supported by a point(statement) that is contradictory or that weakens with option in blank A.
Clearly (I) is contradictory to (II) and therefore is   the statement   we are looking for.
What does this   statement   support?: The   point   just before that -   popular species receive a disproportionate amount at the money and public attention devoted to preservation at species

Purnank · Answer

A - very few of the more-popular species have any chance of escaping extinction.
B - popular species receive a disproportionate amount at the money and public attention devoted to preservation at species.

PReciSioN · Answer

Is the OA correct? Should it not be

A: very few of the more-popular species have any chance of escaping extinction
B: many species that are not popular are likely to escape extinction

How can it undermine support for - "popular species receive a disproportionate amount at the money and public attention devoted to preservation at species" This is a fact.

Can anyone verify?  Sajjad1994  ,  chetan2u   KarishmaB   egmat

Hoehenheim · Answer

following for expert insight....
Is this from the 2024-25 OG?

xqh · Answer

yes https://gmatclub.com/forum/download/file.php?id=82672 https://gmatclub.com/forum/download/file.php?id=82673 GMAT-Club-Forum-nv7pvdej.png GMAT-Club-Forum-jyln5v43.png

Gemmie · Answer

The biologist's reasoning is subject to the criticism that the claim that ____A:  many popular species are unlikely to survive ____, which is used to justify the main point, undermines the support for the point that ____B:  popular species receive a disproportionate amount of funding and attention ____.

---

The biologist also contends that despite significant investment,  many popular species are unlikely to survive (A)  to support the mainpoint that the funding should be re-allocated to less popular species

=> The biologist's argument makes a hasty generalization by assuming that the reason popular species receive more funding is solely due to their popularity. It's quite possible that these species are also at greater risk of extinction, which would justify the disproportionate allocation of resources.

This reasoning undermines the statement that  popular species receive a disproportionate amount of funding and attention (B)  compared to less popular species.

Adarsh_24 · Answer

I agree with you.

below is given in stem,
 many of these less-popular species are more in danger of extinction than the more popular species.

so if popular species that are greater in number can’t be saved. Then the unpopular ones for which many are lesser in number can’t be saved either.
That does make sense to me.

the other one OA is a fact, I don’t know how this particular point undermines that.

SudsMeister · Answer

I think the main issue here is recognising that the words 'the support' in the question are used as noun and not as a verb.
 
Let's mark the portions of the excerpt:
 
Sentence 1 = Popular species receive disproportionately large funding than less-popular species.
Sentence 2 = Indeed, many of these less-popular species are more in danger of extinction than the more popular species.
Sentence 3 = Many biologists accept this pattern of disproportionate funding, I believe it needs to stop.
Sentence 4 = For, despite the substantial, continuing expenditure on the more popular species, very few species have any chance of escaping extinction.
 
Let's mark our sentences to make a logical sequence:
Sentence 1 is a point made. Sentence 2 supports sentence 1 by using the word 'indeed'. Sentence 3 is the main conclusion. Sentence 4 supports the main conclusion.
 
Now, we can very easily point that sentence 4 and sentence 2 contradict each other, to be more precise, sentence 4 undermines sentence 2.
 
Let's elaborate our answer: The biologist's reasoning is subject to the criticism that the claim that _(A)_ which is used to justify the main point   (i.e. sentence 3)  , undermines the support   (i.e. sentence 2)   for the point that _(B)_.
Notice: the words 'the support' here refer to sentence 2 and don't act like a verb.
 
So, the answer is saying that: Claim A. which is used to justify sentence 3, undermines sentence 2 which supports point B.
 
Claim A can only be sentence 4. And sentence 4 undermines sentence 3 evidently and this relationship is already revealed in the answer. Now, what does sentence 2 support? That gives us the answer to point B. As per our earlier deduction, sentence 2 supports sentence 1. So, point B = sentence 1.
 
Answer:
A = very few of the more-popular species have any chance of escaping extinction
B = popular species receive a disproportionate amount at the money and public attention devoted to preservation at species.
 
Had the question statement been redesigned as:
 The biologist's reasoning is subject to the criticism that the claim that ____ A ____, which is used to justify the main point, undermines the point that ____ B ____,  then our answer would change for B, where B = sentence 2.

Adit_ · Answer

I am not sure how the OA for B actually is undermined by A. There is however no other better option I see. The second one I did feel really close but is it because of the fact that there is no mention of endangered species as such and its out of scope?

Biologist: Conservation biologists working to prevent species

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

A	B
		popular species receive a disproportionate amount at the money and public attention devoted to preservation at species
		funding and public attention should not be wasted on the preservation of endangered species
		certain popular species are more endangered than many believe
		many species that are not popular are likely to escape extinction
		very few of the more-popular species have any chance of escaping extinction

GMAT Two-part Analysis (TPA) Questions

Biologist: Conservation biologists working to prevent species

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