Reading comp PrepTest 153 · Section 1 · Question 14

Passage

 A recent worldwide decline of ocean fishery stocks has stimulated rapid growth in cultivated production of fish and shellfish, usually Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage SummaryTopic: Science

Paragraph 1
  • Paragraph note
    • Background/stats are given, a view is put forward, and the Author disagrees with that view while introducing a paradox
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • (Stats) - We tag this so that we head back to this section for any question that deals with stats
    • Some experts - Fish farming will restore wild fish populations
    • Author - There's no evidence of that
    • Paradox - Fish farming could solve or make worse declining ocean fishery populations
Paragraph 2
  • Paragraph note
    • First way that fish farming can threaten ocean fishery stock
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • High-volume fish farming causes pollution, ecological disruption, and disease
Paragraph 3
  • Paragraph note
    • Second (and more important) way that fish farming can threaten ocean fishery stock
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • More important - Fish farming requires a lot of fish meal/oil, to the point where more fish are required for farming that you get out
Paragraph 4
  • Paragraph note
    • First way that fish farming can help ocean fishery stock
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Reduce pressure by decreasing profitability or offering alternatives
    • Examples - Salmon; tilapia/channel catfish/cod/haddock
    • BUT! - Niche markets may undercut these benefits
Main Point:
Fish farming is paradoxical, in that there are ways it can cause both the decline and protection of ocean fishery stock.

Key Lines:
Lines 11-14 - An opposing point is introduced and the Author rebuts it
Lines 15-18 - The Author puts forward a paradox that she explores through the rest of the passage
Lines 19-23 - One side of the paradox is examined (negative side)
Lines 32-33 - Another part of the same side of the paradox is examined
Lines 48-55 - The other side of the paradox is examined (positive side)
Lines 55-57 - A factor that may counteract the positive side of the paradox is discussed

Meta-Structure:
Examination of a paradox. All paradoxes have two sides that seem to contradict each other.

When an RC passage introduces a paradox, it's generally the case that at least one paragraph will be dedicated to each side of the paradox, and then there's generally a concluding paragraph that either resolves the paradox or concludes that one side of it is wrong. Here, we get two paragraphs dedicated to one side of the paradox, one paragraph to the other, and no resolution of it. While the Author does discuss something that may counteract the "positive" side of the paradox, she doesn't state that the positive won't come to pass (wild fish stock won't rebound), or that the negative is destined to happen (wild fish stock decline).

So this passage is about the paradox—introducing and exploring it—instead of resolving the paradox. As such, we should make sure that we pick answers that reflect the uncertainty of the outcome, in the Author's opinion.

Last Thoughts:
Everything we said in the Meta-Structure section is true, but the Author here does spend more time on the downsides (Paragraphs 2 and 3, as opposed to half of Paragraph 4), introduces the paradox by stating that there's no evidence that fish farming will help with wild fish stock (Lines 13-14), and introduces something that will potentially counteract the positive effect of fish farming on the wild stock (Lines 55-57). So we should be willing to pick answers that, while reflecting uncertainty, are a little pessimistic towards how fish farming will affect wild fish stock populations.

Question prompt

The author 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

Answer choices

  1. A
    Such pollution is problematic Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    Incorrect. (Lines 24-31) There's no mention of genetic mutations in the relevant section—just the spread of pathogens, which isn't the same thing.
  2. B
    Such pollution contributes to Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    Incorrect. (Lines 24-31) The passage does note that this pollution results in habitat destruction in coastal areas, but it doesn't compare it to other types of pollution, so this answer features an unsupported comparison.
  3. C
    Such pollution is less Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C matches the stem
    Correct. Question Type:
    Must Be True

    Strategy Overview:
    Head back to the section that discussed pollution caused by fish farming and then find an answer reflecting it

    Answer Anticipation/Relevant Lines:
    Checking our notations, we can see that Paragraph 2 mentioned pollution as a way that the more intensive fish farming could threaten ocean fishery stock. Heading back there, we can see that the Author mentions in Lines 24-31 that fish farm population density results in a lot of waste being generated and pathogens spreading, which can escape into the wild and lead to habitat destruction, affecting wild fishery stocks. Let's find an answer reflecting these details.

    Answer Explanation:
    (Lines 19-22) Paragraph 2 starts by noting that the ""more intensive"" versions of fish farming lead to ecological disruptions. As such, the Author implies that less intensive fish farming would be less likely to lead to these issues, as this answer states.

    Key Takeaway:
    In an RC passage, unless the question is asking about an opposing viewpoint, never lose sight of the Author's main point. Unless there's a concession made in the passage, the correct answers will almost all line up with that main point.
  4. D
    Such pollution cannot be Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    Incorrect. (Paragraph 2) There's no mention of government intervention in Paragraph 2. Additionally, the Author notes that this type of farming ""usually involves"" enclosed fish populations that generate waste/pollution, so it doesn't seem inevitable that these farms can't address the pollution issue.
  5. E
    Such pollution is, however Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    Incorrect. (Lines 15-18) The Author whole point is that the production systems for fish are complicated enough that fish farming could either help or hurt wild fish populations—it's impossible to know ahead of time. As such, this answer suggesting that fish farming will relieve pressure on wild fishery stocks is too definitive—the Author believes that's only one possible outcome of the increased importance of fish farming.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 7%
  2. B 8%
  3. C Credited 58%
  4. D 2%
  5. E 25%

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