Self-study
Support Traditional hatcheries raise fish in featureless environments and subject them to dull routines, whereas new, experimental hatcheries raise fish in visually stimulating environments with varied routines. ████ ████████ ████ ███ █████ ████ ████ ███ ████████████ ██████████ ███ ██████ ████ █████ ████ ███████████ ██████████ ██ █████████ ███ ████████████ ███ ██████ ███ █████ ██ █████ ████ ██████ ██ ███ ████████████ ███████████ ██████████ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ███████ █████ █████ ████████
Summary
The author concludes that fish raised in the experimental hatcheries are more likely to survive after their release into the wild than are fish raised in traditional hatcheries.
Why?
Because fish released into the wild from the experimental hatcheries are bolder than those released from traditional hatcheries when it comes to exploring new environments and trying new types of food.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that being bolder at exploring new environments and trying new types of food is conducive to the survival of a hatchery-raised fish released into the wild.
The author assumes that there aren’t other differences between the two kinds of fish that would decrease the chances of survival for the experimental-hatchery-raised fish more than the fish’s boldness increases chances of survival.
17.
Which one of the following ██ ██ ██████████ ████████ ██ ███ █████████
a
It is economically ████████ ███ ████████ █████████ ██ ██████ ████ ██ ███████ ██████ ███████████ ███ ██ ████ ██████ █████████
The conclusion is about which fish survive better after release. Whether the hatchery operators can afford the experimental setup has nothing to do with how fish raised that way perform in the wild. The argument's causal chain runs from hatchery conditions to fish boldness to survival. Operator budgets aren't part of that chain.
b
The quality of ███ ████████████ ████ █████ ███████████████ ████ ███ ████████ ███ ██████ ██████ ██ ███ ██████ ████████ █████
The argument is comparative. The author claims only that experimental fish are more likely to survive than traditional fish. The release environment could matter enormously for both groups, and experimental fish could still come out ahead. Picture releasing both groups into a toxic lake. The environment wrecks everyone's chances, but experimental fish might still outlast traditional ones. Whatever role the environment plays, one group can still outperform the other.
c
Some fish raised ██ ███████████ ██████████ ███ ███████ ████ ███ ███ █████ ██ █████ ████████ ███ █████
Necessary. The argument leans on "bolder at trying new foods" as support for higher survival. That premise can support the conclusion only if timid foraging actually costs some traditional-hatchery fish their lives. Otherwise, being bolder at new foods is a behavioral quirk with no survival payoff, and citing it as evidence of higher survival makes no sense.
Negation test: Assume NO traditional-hatchery fish die because they are too timid in foraging. Under that world, timidity in foraging doesn't threaten survival at all, so the experimental fish's food-boldness advantage can't explain why they survive better. Timid eaters were going to be fine anyway. The food-boldness premise stops supporting the conclusion, so the author must assume (C).
d
Hatchery-raised fish that ███ ████████ ████ ███ ████ ████ ██ ███ ████ █████████ █████ ██ ████ ██ ████████
This escalates the requirement. The argument just needs boldness toward new foods to provide some survival advantage. It doesn't need released fish to require many different food types to survive. A fish could find a single new food source in the wild, settle in, and do fine, as long as boldness helped it locate that source in the first place. "Many different types" is more than the argument needs.
e
Fish in the ████ ██████ ████ ██ ████████ ███████████ █████████████
The visual-stimulation detail is part of the setup. It explains why experimental fish ended up bolder in the first place. That line of reasoning doesn't require the wild to be visually stimulating too. A fish that developed boldness growing up can still benefit from that boldness in the wild, whether or not the wild itself is visually stimulating.