When the technique known as gene-splicing was invented in the early 19

I pick D.
A,B out. (parallelism)
C,E means (as much as I understand) 'no humans have any natural defence against it', which I think is not the intended meaning.

D is the best.

D,E - out 'them' doesn't refer back to 'a microbe'

A,B,C

B - 'with no' - changes the meaning - out
A,C - tough one to choose

Going with A

C - 'kill' doesn't sound right in this sentense.

Stuck between A and C , I would go for C.

A ==> a microbe that might escape and it would kill (does not sound good)
C ==> a microbe that might escape and kill

Chose A.
In C:
scientists might inadvertently create an “Andromeda strain,” ...and kill vast vast numbers of ....
doesn't sounds right. It's not scientists who are going to kill but microbe..

When the technique known as gene-splicing was invented in the early 1970’s, it was feared that scientists might inadvertently create an “Andromeda strain,” a microbe never before seen on Earth that might escape from the laboratory and it would kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it.

(A) it would kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it - Parallelism issue - and it would kill
(B) it might kill vast numbers of humans with no natural defenses against it - Parallelism issue - and it would kill ; lack would and thus do not express the conditional.

(C) kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it - Correct
(D) kill vast numbers of humans who have no natural defenses against them - Pronoun issue - them used to refer to singular microbe ; lack would and thus do not express the conditional.
(E) kill vast numbers of humans with no natural defenses against them - Pronoun issue - them used to refer to singular microbe ; lack would and thus do not express the conditional.


Answer C

As per rule : The helping verb would expresses the future from the past's point of view.
Why A is wrong? What's the difference between 'it would kill vast' and 'kill vast'
Thanks

humans did not have defenses against microbe and microbe is singular subject and needs to be referred by it not them...............thereby ruling out options d and e.
paralellism is flawed in options A and B.
It should be M might escape and kill
neither M might escape and it would kill
nor M might escape and it might kill

Hello Experts
Nevernevergiveup, sayantanc2k, Skywalker18, msk0657, Abhishek009, mikemcgarry, GMATNinjaTwo, souvik101990, Gnpth, sallysea, GMATNinja, dentobizz, Nightfury14, ziyuen, MacFauz, carcass, chetan2u, yezz, Narenn, daagh

Do any of you have any comments regarding numbers of?
Is this phrase correct and if so when to use it compared with number of

another question with similar issue: https://gmatclub.com/forum/new-jerseys- ... 81139.html

I am not able to wrap my head around this phrase - i though number of is the ONLY acceptable form!!!
So please shed some light on this issue.
Thanks a lot in advance.

manishtank1988 It is ambiguous for this problem. I would suggest you to study from Official Guide (OG) & Manhattan SC ONLY. This question is NOT from OG.

(1) The numbers of is almost always incorrect. Stick to the expression the number of.

Wrong: THE NUMBERS of dogs in Montana ARE steadily increasing.
Right: THE NUMBER of dogs in Montana IS steadily increasing.

(2) However, numbers is possible in a few contexts. If you wish to make a comparison, use GREATER than, not more than (which might imply that the quantity of numbers is larger, not the numbers themselves).

See the Idiom List for more details

Wrong: The rare Montauk beaked griffin is not extinct; its NUMBERS are now sus­pected to be much MORE than before.
Right: The rare Montauk beaked griffin is not extinct; its NUMBERS are now sus­pected to be much GREATER than before.

Got it, thanks ziyuen

The guiding principle is that if a number is a potentially dynamic one changing very often, then numbers will be the one. For example, if we are reporting on the ever-changing index figure of Nasdaq on a particular day, we cannot perhaps denote it with a particular number or at a particular number.
On the contrary, if we want to report at 11.00 am the number of students who took the GMAT on a given date at a particular center, one hour after entry is closed, then that figure could be reported as 'the number' as that number is not going to change. So the usage is more contextual rather than conceptual.
But, The given topic doesn't entail a discussion on this issue as all the five choices have the word 'numbers'. However, to generalize that the number or a number is the only acceptable form is rather to overreach. If that were so, GMAT would not have used it elsewhere as given below.
1. The gyrfalcon, an Arctic bird of prey, has survived a close brush with extinction; its numbers are now five times greater than when the use of DDT was sharply restricted in the early 1970’s. (OG verbal review)

(A) extinction; its numbers are now five times greater than
(B) extinction; its numbers are now five times more than
(C) extinction, their numbers now fivefold what they were
(D) extinction, now with fivefold the numbers they had
(E) extinction, now with numbers five times greater than
Ans A.

2. With an awareness that there are connotations associated with the numbers 1 and 2 and the letters A and B, companies conducting consumer taste tests of foods or beverages typically choose numbers such as 697 or 483 to label the products. (GMAT Prep)

(A) With an awareness that there are connotations associated with the numbers 1 and 2 and the letters A and B
(B) Because the numbers 1 and 2 and the letters A and B have connotations they are aware of
(C) Because of an awareness of the numbers 1 and 2 and the letters A and B having connotations
(D) Aware of the connotations of the numbers 1 and 2 and the letters A and B
(E) Since the numbers one, two, and the letters A and B have connotations associated with them and they are aware of it

Ans: D

Thanks daagh

First thing to notice here is parallelism. It says that ‘a microbe… might escape and …

So, our option will have to be parallel with escape.

This leaves out Options A and B.

Eliminate A and B.

Now, the second clue:

Among Options C, D and E, only C has the correct pronoun ‘it’ which refers to the singular noun ‘a microbe’.

Eliminate Options D and E.

Option C is the best choice.

Hope this helps!

When the technique known as gene-splicing was invented in the early 1970’s, it was feared that scientists might inadvertently create an “Andromeda strain,” a microbe never before seen on Earth that might escape from the laboratory and it would kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it.

Elimination sequence: A,B then E, then D.

(A) it would kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it - Parallelism error: that might escape and it would kill

(B) it might kill vast numbers of humans with no natural defenses against it - Parallelism error: that might escape and it would kill

(C) kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it - CORRECT

(D) kill vast numbers of humans who have no natural defenses against them - a microbe (singular) where as them (plural)

(E) kill vast numbers of humans with no natural defenses against them - Ambiguous modification by prepositional phrase 'with no defenses'. Would the microbe kill (using)with no defenses or humans with no defenses.

CrackverbalGMAT
We eliminate (A) because there is no comma before “and”. Thus, it cannot be a sentence parallel with a sentence. Am I correct?
“It” can refer to a microbe, and would is the same tense as might. I cannot find any other errors in (A).

Posted from my mobile device

Hello Tanchat,

We hope this finds you well.

To answer your query, your reasoning is largely correct here.

However, A also features a meaning error; "it would kill vast numbers of humans" incorrectly implies an “Andromeda strain" is a microbe that might escape and that would definitely kill vast numbers of humans; the intended meaning is that an “Andromeda strain" is a microbe that might escape and might kill vast numbers of humans.

We hope this helps.
All the best!
Experts' Global Team

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.