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

Question

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

(B) it might kill vast numbers of humans with no natural defenses against it

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

(D) kill vast numbers of humans who have no natural defenses against them

(E) kill vast numbers of humans with no natural defenses against them

https://www.nytimes.com/1987/06/09/science/concern-over-genetics-prompts-a-new-coalition-of-critics.html

When the powerful new technique known as gene-splicing was invented in the early 1970's, the prime worry was that scientists might inadvertently create an ''Andromeda strain,'' a microbe never before seen on Earth that might escape from the laboratory and  kill vast numbers of humans who would have no natural defenses against it . That nightmare has failed to materialize.

sleepynut · Accepted Answer

Hi,
I also pick the wrong one and realize my mistake later.

The underline portion refers to " a microbe".
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.
The above noun phrase is a noun modifier of "an “Andromeda strain".Here,the parallelism comes into play;a microbe that might escape and (that might) kill.

Notice that there is no comma before "and".Hence,the subject of these two verbs--"escape" and "kill"--is the same.This leave us with option C,D and E.

However,the latter two options have the pronoun error,using "them" to refer to singular noun "a microbe".
Thus,the answer is option C.

Hi all,if anything is wrong,please feel free to correct me
Happy learning :-)

sayantanc2k · Answer

Four major problems with option A are as follows:

1. The pronoun "it" is wrong - should be "that" in order to maintain parallelism: "that might escape and that would kill".

2. "Would" is wrong. If "might" is used for escape, the same should also be used for kill. The word "might" indicates a lower probability than he word "would". "Might escape" has a less probabilty of happening than " would kill" - this is not logical, because the microbe can kill only after it escapes. Hence probability of escaping cannot be less than the probabilty of killing.

3. Wrong punctuation: 
When two independent clauses are joined,  comma + and  is required. 
 I sing , and  I play .
When two verbs are joined,  and  ( without comma) is required.
I  sing  and  play  .
In option A, absence of comma before  and  indicates that two verbs are required to be joined, not two clauses. However in option A, an absolute modifier is erroneously joined with a clause:
a microbe never before seen on Earth that might escape from the laboratory : absolute modifier
it would kill vast numbers of humans.. : independent clause

4. Parallelism:
In the parallel structure  X AND Y , X and Y should be structurally same. As already described above, an absolute modifier has been wrongly made parallel with an independent clause.

============================================================

In option C, two verbs are correctly joined with AND:  .....might escape and (might) kill.  (Omission of "might" is allowed in the second element, i.e. Y, by virtue of paralllism.)

sumande · Answer

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.

syamee_u · Answer

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.

dips · Answer

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

Juaz · Answer

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..

Skywalker18 · Answer

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

kanusha · Answer

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

Nevernevergiveup · Answer

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

manishtank1988 · Answer

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. :-)

BillyZ · Answer

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.

manishtank1988 · Answer

Got it, thanks ziyuen :cool

daagh · Answer

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

manishtank1988 · Answer

Thanks  daagh

CrackverbalGMAT · Answer

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!

StringArgs · Answer

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.

Tanchat · Answer

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

ExpertsGlobal5 · Answer

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

VerbalBot · Answer

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.

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

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 Sentence Correction (SC - EA only) Questions

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

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