Reading comp PrepTest 109 · Section 2 · Question 15

Passage

Questions 15-22  .        Experts anticipate that global atmospheric  . concentrations of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) will have  . Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Science


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Some researchers' argument (more CO2 in the atmosphere will increase vegetation and slow global warming)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Experts' view:
      • The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere will double by the end of the century (first sentence)
    • Cause-and-effect relationship, according to experts:
      • CO2 can cause global warming by trapping solar energy (second sentence)
    • Some researchers' view:
      • More CO2 will cause a chain reaction that actually fights the effects of global warming (third sentence)
    • Cause-and-effect relationship, according to some researchers:
      • More CO2 will cause more plants, which will cause more absorption of CO2, which will cause a lower increase of CO2 than predicted (third through last sentences)
    • Author's attitude: "is known" (second sentence)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Studies show more CO2 won't increase vegetation (more CO2 reduces crops, reduces stability, and increases fires)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Cause-and-effect relationships, according to studies:
      • More CO2 would cause some plants to outcompete others, which could cause a reduction in some important crops like corn and sugar cane (first and second sentences)
      • More CO2 could also cause an increase in certain weeds, which could cause ecosystem instability or more severe wildfires (third through last sentences)
    • Author's attitude: "However" (first sentence), "important crops" (second sentence), "may lead to" (last sentence), "more severe" (last sentence)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Billings' study shows more CO2 won't slow global warming (more plants won't offset increased decomposition)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Cause-and-effect relationship, according to Billings:
      • In wet tundra grasslands, increased temperatures will cause more CO2, which will cause increased plant growth, which causes more peat (dead plant material) to decompose, which causes a significant increase in CO2 that the increased plant growth can't offset (third through eighth sentences)
    • Author's view:
      • Billings' study is important because the tundra will experience the greatest temperature increase from global warming (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "It is clear" (first sentence), "does not guarantee" (first sentence) "particularly important" (last sentence)

Main Point: Studies suggest elevated CO2 levels will not guarantee lush agriculture or reduce global warming.

Meta-Structure?

Correcting the Record: This passage utilizes a Correcting the Record Meta-Structure.* In a Correcting the Record passage, the author will describe a common misconception or false belief. Often, this belief is based on a lack of information. The author then explains why the beliefs are false.

That's precisely how this passage progresses. The author introduces the belief that expected increases of CO2 in the atmosphere could make the world agriculturally lush and even decrease the rate of global warming. The author then corrects both of those points with new studies. According to these studies, increased CO2 will not make the world agriculturally lush (because some plants will increase more than others, reducing ecological stability and increasing the prevalence of wildfires) or slow global warming (because it will increase decomposition and release even more CO2).

In passages that use a Correcting the Record Meta-Structure, the main point will generally summarize the author's explanation of why the misconception is false or just an assertion that the misconceptions are false. We kept it simple with our summary: "Studies suggest elevated CO2 levels will not guarantee lush agriculture or reduce global warming."

Cause and effect: The most prominent minor Meta-Structure is cause and effect. This isn't surprising, as this minor Meta-Structure is prevalent in science passages. Each paragraph asserts a cause-and-effect relationship. Having these noted or highlighted will help you answer the inevitable questions about these relationships.

Last Thoughts?

There's no way around it: this is a dense, science-y passage. It's made a lot more tolerable, however, by realizing that the passage's arguments are causal arguments. The author and all the researchers mentioned — they are all making arguments about certain causes leading to certain effects. The hypothesis in the first sentence says that more CO2 will cause a decrease in the rate of global warming. The author says that CO2 will really just cause agricultural issues and the release of even more CO2. If you can, try committing these relationships to memory! It'll save you a lot of time and headaches as you answer the questions!

Question prompt

Which one of the Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: C

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Science

Strategy Overview

Reiterate the main point as we summarized it after reading through the passage, then find the answer that best matches it

Answer Anticipation

As discussed in the Meta-Structure section, this passage utilizes a Correcting the Record Meta-Structure. The author introduces the belief that expected increases of CO2 in the atmosphere could make the world agriculturally lush and even decrease the rate of global warming. The author then corrects both of those points with new studies. According to these studies, increased CO2 will not make the world agriculturally lush (because some plants will increase more than others, reducing ecological stability and increasing the prevalence of wildfires) or slow global warming (because it will increase decomposition and release even more CO2).In passages that use a Correcting the Record Meta-Structure, the main point will generally summarize the author's explanation of why the misconception is false or just an assertion that the misconceptions are false. We kept it simple with our summary: "Studies suggest elevated CO2 levels will not guarantee lush agriculture or reduce global warming."Let's look for an answer choice that matches these ideas.

Answer choices

  1. A
    Elevated levels of CO Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Does this match the main point we anticipated ("Studies suggest elevated CO2 levels will not guarantee lush agriculture or reduce global warming")?

    Nope. This is one part of the belief that the author corrects. The author doesn't think this belief is true. Moreover, this answer choice is missing anything related to global warming. Let's cross off (A).

  2. B
    Recent studies have yielded Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) Does this match the main point we anticipated ("Studies suggest elevated CO2 levels will not guarantee lush agriculture or reduce global warming")?

    Not exactly. But some test-takers think this answer choice is accurate — the first paragraph's studies say CO2 might increase vegetation, while the second paragraph's studies say they won't.

    However, it's not enough that this answer choice is accurate. It needs to summarize the author's position. And the author doesn't think those first paragraph's studies are reliable. The author uses the second paragraph's studies to correct the predictions made with the first paragraph's studies. Moreover, this answer choice is missing anything related to global warming. We can eliminate (B).

  3. C
    The possible beneficial effects Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C matches the stem

    (C) Does this match the main point we anticipated ("Studies suggest elevated CO2 levels will not guarantee lush agriculture or reduce global warming")?

    Yes! This matches what we anticipated almost perfectly. It says the elevated CO2 levels will not guarantee lush agriculture or reduce global warming (by saying these "possible beneficial effects ... have been overstated"). (C) is our answer! We can justifiably select (C) and immediately advance to the following question.

  4. D
    Increased levels of CO Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) Does this match the main point we anticipated ("Studies suggest elevated CO2 levels will not guarantee lush agriculture or reduce global warming")?

    Nope. This is a premise of the author's argument but doesn't summarize the author's conclusion. This answer choice omits the author's point that this growth differential will increase vegetation overall. Moreover, this answer choice is missing anything related to global warming. For these reasons, let's eliminate (D).

  5. E
    Increased levels of CO Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) Does this match the main point we anticipated ("Studies suggest elevated CO2 levels will not guarantee lush agriculture or reduce global warming")?

    Not quite. The author doesn't claim that increased levels of CO2 will increase plant growth. The author thinks the increased CO2 will increase some plants' growth but will ultimately harm ecosystems. And if we really want to nitpick, the author also claims that increased CO2 will not slow global warming — the author never says it'll increase the rate of global warming.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 4%
  2. B 15%
  3. C Credited 63%
  4. D 3%
  5. E 14%

Deeper help

Ask follow-ups on any step

Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.

Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.

Discussion