Reading comp PrepTest 132 · Section 1 · Question 8

Passage

Questions 1-8  .        To study centuries-old earthquakes and the geologic  . faults that caused them, seismologists usually dig  . Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Science


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Traditional approach to dating earthquakes (radiocarbon dating of carbon 14 isotopes in organic material near faults)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Old approach:
      • Radiocarbon dating (of carbon 14 isotopes) of organic material trapped in sediments that show evidence of having shifted near fault lines (first through third sentence)
      • This can show the location and frequency of past earthquakes and the likelihood of future earthquakes (last sentence)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • New approach to dating earthquakes (lichenometry — measuring lichen growth along rocks)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • New approach:
      • Bull and Brandon developed lichenometry, which involves measuring lichen growth along rocks exposed by rockfalls following earthquakes (first through fourth sentences)
      • The number of rockfalls can show how strong the earthquake was and the location of rockfalls can help map the earthquake's epicenter (seventh and last sentences)
    • Example of lichen's slow and steady growth:
      • North American lichen, which grows 9.5 mm/year (fifth sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "provides direct evidence" (sixth sentence); "would imply" (seventh sentence); "can then be determined" (last sentence)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Author on disadvantages of radiocarbon dating (not accurate in last 300 years, as the environment affects isotopes) and Bull/Brandon's requirements for lichenometry (minimize/factor disturbances like snow, shade, wind)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's view:
      • Lichenometry has distinct advantages over radiocarbon dating, the latter of which is only accurate to within +/- 40 years and not of much use in the past 300 years (first through third sentences)
    • Bull and Brandon's view:
      • Lichenometry is accurate to within +/- 10 years and best in the past 500 years, but one needs to take into account the factors that can speed or slow lichen growth, like snow, wind, and shade (fifth through last sentences)
    • Cause-and-effect relationships:
      • Radiation on the Earth's upper atmosphere causes the amount of carbon 14 isotope to vary (second sentence)
      • Heavy radiation fluctuation in the last 300 years causes radiocarbon dating during this era to be useless (third sentence)
      • Snow avalanches and other disturbances can cause lichen growth to slow down (last sentence)
      • Shade and wind causes lichen growth to speed up (last sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "distinct advantages" (first sentence); "accurate only to within plus or minus 40 years" (second sentence); "fluctuated greatly" (third sentence); "of little value" (third sentence)

Main Point: Even though it requires careful site selection and calibration, lichenometry, a new technique for dating past earthquakes, has several advantages over the traditional radiocarbon dating technique.

Meta-Structure?

OldApproach/New Approach: This passage fits the Old Approach/New Approach Meta-Structure like a glove. In such a passage, the author will typically start by describing an old way of doing something or thinking about something. Often, this is referred to as the "traditional" approach or theory). The author will then describe a new, alternative way of doing or thinking about that same thing. Usually, the author prefers the new approach.

That's what happens here. The author introduces the "usual[]" technique in the first paragraph before shifting to the new technique in the second. When a passage utilizes this Old Approach/New Approach Meta-Structure, the author's opinion on the new approach is usually the main point. Here, the author feels that it has "distinct advantages" over the old technique, so we should ground our understanding of the main point in that view.

Last Thoughts?

Be careful with the end of this passage, starting in the fifth sentence of the last paragraph (beginning with "They note"). The author pivots here, stating that Bull and Brandon note some limitations on lichenometry — careful site selection and calibration. However, that doesn't undercut the author's claim that lichenometry has "distinct advantages" over radiocarbon dating, so we shouldn't feel as if this section is enough to make the author want to abandon the practice. That opening line of the third paragraph is still the clearest statement of the author's opinion.

Question prompt

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

Credited answer: D

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

Question Type

Science

Strategy Overview

Review the main point and any relevant parts of the passage and notes, if necessary, to anticipate what might happen in the scenario described

Answer Anticipation

This question asks us to infer which hypothetical situation described by the answer choices lichenometry would be most appropriate for. To answer this question, we can start by reviewing which situations lichenometry can be applied to. Once we review our notes and the relevant part of the passage, we can anticipate what to look for in the hypothetical situation described by the answer choices.Our note for the second paragraph says lichenometry involves "measuring lichen growth along rocks," so we're going to need some rocks and lichen, at the very least. Our note for the third paragraph brings up some limitations and requirements for lichenometry. According to that note, we need to "minimize/factor disturbances like snow, shade, wind." So, ideally, the location won't be subject to heavy snow, shade, or wind since these would make it harder to date the earthquake.We could review these two paragraphs, but that's a lot to re-read for just one question. So, we'll likely be better served by heading to the answers and using our notes to guide us through the answer choices, checking the passage as needed to corroborate the answer we think is correct. We should also keep radiocarbon dating in mind, as there will likely be an answer or two where that process would be preferable, and we can eliminate those answers quickly.

Answer choices

  1. A
    identifying the number of Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Does this present a situation where there's lichen growth on rocks that have not been subject to heavy snow, shade, or wind?

    No. In fact, this is way off-base. Lichenometry is used to date earthquakes, not count the number of times something happened. Plus, it's unclear whether lichen would grow in a river. Would there be rockfalls there? And if we reviewed the passage (or remember this detail), we'd know that Bull and Brandon say that lichenometry is best used to date things within the last 500 years (P3, S5) and that lichen stops growing after 1,000 years (P2, S4). Let's cross (A) off.

  2. B
    identifying the age of Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) Does this present a situation where there's lichen growth on rocks that have not been subject to heavy snow, shade, or wind?

    Unlike (A), this is at least about identifying something's age. However, there are no rocks in this answer choice. And if we reviewed the passage (or remember this detail), we'd know that Bull and Brandon say that lichenometry is best used to date things within the last 500 years (P3, S5) and that lichen stops growing after 1,000 years (P2, S4). So, this relic is too old. Let's eliminate (B).

  3. C
    identifying the age of Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited

    (C) Does this present a situation where there's lichen growth on rocks that have not been subject to heavy snow, shade, or wind?

    Unlike (A), this is at least about identifying something's age. And there might be some rocks on this underwater beach! But if a snow avalanche disturbs lichen growth, lichens being underwater likely would, as well. So, this doesn't seem ideal for lichenometry.

  4. D
    identifying the rate, in Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D matches the stem

    (D) Does this present a situation where there's lichen growth on rocks that have not been subject to heavy snow, shade, or wind?

    Well, if a glacier is receding up a mountain valley, then it's leaving exposed rock in its wake. There's no indication of any disturbances that would interrupt the lichen from growing on these rock faces and then growing outward. Thus, the lichen could be used to determine when each rock was exposed by the retreating glacier, and the speed of the glacier could then be determined by comparing it. This is a situation that lends itself to lichenometry, so it's the correct answer.

  5. E
    identifying local trends in Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) Does this present a situation where there's lichen growth on rocks that have not been subject to heavy snow, shade, or wind?

    No. In fact, this is way off-base. Lichenometry is used to date things, not identify trends in annual rainfall. This answer is trying to tempt us by placing it over the past 500 years. However, there's no indication that lichen growth can in any way tell you anything about rainfall rates. In short, this answer is distracting you with the timeline and then presenting lichenometry as a way of measuring something it's not designed to measure!

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 5%
  2. B 6%
  3. C 7%
  4. D Credited 65%
  5. E 17%

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

No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.