Reading comp PrepTest 127 · Section 4 · Question 14

Passage

Questions 8-15  .        Mechanisms for recognizing kin are found  . throughout the plant and animal kingdoms, regardless  . of Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Science


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • A question (why do organisms recognize kin?) and one answer (inclusive fitness theory: help relatives to increase genetic representation)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Inclusive fitness theory proponents' view:
      • Organisms pass on genes through offspring and relatives, so recognizing kin allows the organism to help its relatives and increase its genetic representation (fourth and fifth sentences)
    • Comparison, according to the author:
      • Traditional evolution says that natural selection favors individuals that produce the most offspring, while inclusive fitness theory says that natural selection favors organisms who help their relatives (fifth sentence)
      • But in both cases, natural selection favors these individuals because they increase the organisms' total genetic representation (fifth sentence)
    • Example of phenomena inclusive fitness theory has helped explain, according to the author:
      • The evolution of the honeybee and other social insects, most of which do not produce offspring (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "helped to explain previously mysterious phenomena" (last sentence)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Inclusive fitness theory applied to mysterious cannibal behavior (spadefoot tadpole example, who can become cannibalistic but avoid kin, unless really hungry)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's view:
      • Inclusive fitness theory has been useful in explaining findings on cannibalistic behavior (first sentence)
    • Example of application of inclusive fitness theory to cannibalism, according to the author:
      • Spadefoot toad tadpoles can become cannibalistic but only eat nonrelatives (unless really hungry) (third through last sentences)
    • Cause-and-effect relationships, according to the author:
      • A spadefoot tadpole eating a shrimp or another tadpole causes the tadpole to become larger and entirely carnivorous (fifth sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "applied usefully" (first sentence); "obvious" (second sentence); "suggests" (seventh sentence); "offers at least a partial answer" (seventh sentence); "Interestingly" (last sentence); "apparently" (last sentence)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Alternative answer (avoiding bacteria, tiger salamander larvae example)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's view:
      • Some organisms, like the tiger salamander, may recognize kin to avoid deadly diseases (first and last sentences)
    • Example of an organism that recognizes kin to avoid deadly diseases, according to the author:
      • Tiger salamander larvae sometimes become carnivorous; a deadly bacterium spreads more easily among relatives, so it's safer to eat nonrelatives (second through fourth sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "may be other reasons" (first sentence); "suggests" (fourth sentence); "may favor" (fourth sentence); "can be explained simply" (last sentence)

Main Point: The inclusive fitness theory can explain some instances of kin recognition, but alternative explanations seem to fit other organisms better.

Meta-Structure?

Question/Answer: This passage best fits the Question/Answer Meta-Structure.* In such a passage, the author poses a question early on and uses the rest of the passage to answer that question. That's what this author did. The author asked why so many organisms are able to recognize their kin, irrespective of how complex that organism is. The author provides two possible answers: the inclusive fitness theory and the ... well, the second one isn't given a name, so we'll call it the don't-eat-your-kin-and-die theory.

When a passage uses a Question/Answer Meta-Structure, the main point is generally the answer the author agrees with. The author is open to both answers in this passage (though the author comes just short of fully endorsing either), as the author suggests that both explanations may apply to different organisms. So, we made sure our anticipated main point reflected the author's noncommittal stance.

*That said, you could definitely call this a Phenomenon/Explanation. After all, there is considerable overlap between the Question/Answer and Phenomenon/Explanation Meta-Structures. The author called the issue of kin recognition a "question" in the first paragraph (P1, S2-S3), so we went with Question/Answer. If you went with Phenomenon/Explanation, you'd wind up with the same understanding of the passage's organization and main point.

Example: There are two major examples in this passage, making the example the most prominent minor Meta-Structure in this passage. In fact, at least one example is provided for each explanation of kin recognition. The inclusive fitness theory is explored through the second half of the first paragraph and the second paragraph, both of which have an example (bees/social insects in the first paragraph, cannibal tadpoles in the second paragraph). The "self-preservation" explanation is presented in the third paragraph via an example of a tiger salamander larva. We should expect a few questions on these examples.

Last Thoughts?

There were a lot of details and a lot of science in each paragraph, so we're going to have to rely heavily on the passage's language to help us with the more technical questions. It will be important, therefore, to know what type of information is in each paragraph so that we can quickly orient around the correct one for each question. So, we'll rely heavily on our notes for this passage.

Question prompt

The information in the Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: E

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

Question Type

Science

Strategy Overview

Refer to notes or what you highlighted/underline to locate where the passage discusses honeybees, and refer to the relevant part of the passage as needed to find that answer choice that must be true

Answer Anticipation

For questions that ask us to infer, from a few details in the passage, an answer choice that must be true, quickly finding and reviewing those details is critical. That is why we make brief notes describing the role of each paragraph and highlight or underline definitions and the minor Meta-Structures — doing so helps us find the salient information efficiently and reliably. Once we review that part of the passage, we can look through the answer choices to see which one is best supported by what we reviewed. Since the question stem asks us to make an inference, the correct answer probably won't restate something from the passage. Instead, the question will likely require us to draw a connection between a few different pieces of information.Here, the question brings up honeybees that exist only to nurture relatives. Where did those show up in the passage? Our notes don't mention honeybees, but we should have highlighted or underlined this example in the first paragraph. So, a quick scan of our highlights/underlines (or the use of the CTRL/Command + F search function) should direct our attention to the end of the first paragraph.There, it's said that the inclusive fitness theory has helped to explain previously mysterious behavior, including that of social insects such as bees (P1, S6). Honeybees have some members that only nurture relatives and not reproduce themselves (P1, S6). That's "mysterious" because it doesn't make sense in the context of traditional evolutionary theory, which deals with genes being directly passed on to offspring (P1, S5).So, the correct answer will likely reference this fact about honeybees was mysterious in the context of traditional evolutionary theory but makes more sense now that we have the inclusive fitness theory. With this information in mind, let's head to the answer choices.

Answer choices

  1. A
    was not known to Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Does this say that the fact that most honeybees only exist to nurture relatives was mysterious in the context of traditional evolutionary theory but makes more sense now that we have the inclusive fitness theory?

    Nope. We can cross off (A). But if we reviewed the passage further, we'd be able to see that (A) is false. Inclusive fitness theory was first developed in the 1960s (P1, S3), but the last sentence of the first paragraph says that it helped to explain "previously mysterious phenomena," including this fact about bees (P1, S6). As such, this fact about bees was known before inclusive fitness theory was developed in the 1960s.

  2. B
    can be explained only Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) Does this say that the fact that most honeybees only exist to nurture relatives was mysterious in the context of traditional evolutionary theory but makes more sense now that we have the inclusive fitness theory?

    No. We can eliminate (B). Besides, we wouldn't find any support for (B) even if we re-read the entire passage. The passage never says that inclusive fitness theory requires mutual nurturing. It explains the honeybee behavior by suggesting that these nurturing bees do so because they're nurturing their kin and thus ensuring that some of their genes get passed on (P1, S5), regardless of whether their kin nurtures them back.

  3. C
    is what led most Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) Does this say that the fact that most honeybees only exist to nurture relatives was mysterious in the context of traditional evolutionary theory but makes more sense now that we have the inclusive fitness theory?

    Nope. We can eliminate (C). Besides, there's no indication that the traditional view of evolution is being "reject[ed]." That's too strong. At most, it's being supplemented with another theory that can explain some cases. Rejection would mean that the theory is thrown out completely.

  4. D
    calls into question the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) Does this say that the fact that most honeybees only exist to nurture relatives was mysterious in the context of traditional evolutionary theory but makes more sense now that we have the inclusive fitness theory?

    No. We can cross off (D). But if we reviewed the passage further, we'd be able to see that (D) is false. The author says inclusive fitness theory holds that "natural selection similarly favors" organisms that protect their kin (P1, S5), so inclusive fitness theory and the honeybees' behavior also relies on natural selection.

  5. E
    is difficult to explain Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E matches the stem

    (E) Does this say that the fact that most honeybees only exist to nurture relatives was mysterious in the context of traditional evolutionary theory but makes more sense now that we have the inclusive fitness theory?

    Yes! The passage says that the behavior of social insects like bees is a previously unexplained phenomenon that can be explained by inclusive fitness theory (P1, S6). Since the traditional theory predates inclusive fitness theory and left this phenomenon mysterious (P1, S5), we can infer that the bee-havior (sorry) couldn't be explained by the traditional view alone, and that the supplementary theory (inclusive fitness theory) was needed to help explain it.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 9%
  2. B 5%
  3. C 5%
  4. D 21%
  5. E Credited 61%

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

View all discussions Start a discussion