Question Help

Started by EmilyMarieMenendez · started 2018-07-15 18:31 · last activity 2019-01-07 22:21 · 3 replies

Hello, What might be the best approach for the "It can be inferred from the author's discussion..." questions? I tend to have trouble with these kinds of questions. Thank you, Emily Menendez

Replies

  1. Mehran · 2018-07-15 23:37

    Hi @EmilyMarieMenendez, thanks for your post. "Inference" means "must be true" - there must be textual support in the stimulus (for Logical Reasoning questions) or the passage (for Reading Comprehension questions) for the correct answer. Often, students are able to narrow down the answers to two choices, then get stuck. At this juncture, they lose sight of the need to select the textually-supported answer, and make a mistake. If you are struggling on these questions, you may find it particularly helpful to return to the text before you select your ultimate answer. Hope this helps. Please let us know if you have any additional questions.
  2. Steph · 2019-01-06 16:07

    Hi. Can you please explain why C is the correct answer and not any of the other choices?
  3. Ravi · 2019-01-07 22:21

    @Steph, Happy to help! The question is asking us to infer something from the passage that which of the following would be true of crops impervious to parasitical organisms. The discussion about P. fluorescens bacteria occurs primarily in the first paragraph, so that's where our attention should be focused. Let's say that the crop in question is corn, and we have a type of corn that is impervious to parasitic organisms. Based on the content of the first paragraph, what was the purpose of P. fluorescens? Well, it's noted that it's a bacterium that's antagonistic to a number of harmful phytopathogens/parasitical organisms, and there is evidence that it can help improve crop yields by combating the growth of the parasitical organisms. Answer A is incorrect because P. fluorescens could still be present in the soil in this hypothetical scenario; they just wouldn't help much since the corn is already impervious to the parasitic organisms. Answer B is incorrect because we have no evidence from the passage that P. fluorescens would crowd out and exclude other crop plants. There is no support for this answer, so we can't infer it. We can get rid of B. Answer C says, "their yield would not be likely to be improved by adding P. fluorescens bacteria to the soil." If the soil in our hypothetical is resistant to parasitic organisms (which it is since we're told that it is in the stimulus), then this would be true because the whole purpose of P. fluorescens is to combat the parasitic organisms. If they don't need to be combated, then how will P. fluorescens improve yield? It won't, so this is our correct answer choice. Answer D is incorrect because we have no reason that they would necessarily mature more quickly. What if P. fluorescens were put with the crops that were susceptible to parasitical organisms? Secondly, we have no idea what "maturity" means within the context of these crops, so that's another reason why this can't be inferred. Answer E is incorrect because we have no reason to believe that the levels of phytopathogenic bacteria would be higher compared with other crop plants. Why would they be higher if the crop is resistant to these phytopathogens? We can't infer E, so it's out. Does this help? Let us know if you have any more questions!

Sign in to reply.