PT12.S4.Q03

Comments

• 1 Like

  canihazJD Alum Member Sage ⭐

  November 2020 edited November 2020 8318 karma

  Bug eating plants can thrive in soil too poor in minerals to support non-bug eating plants.
  The mineral requirements of both types of plants is pretty much the same.

  Premise set. Ok plants all need the same stuff. So it sounds like the bug eaters can thrive in bad soil because they get the minerals from the bugs.

  A. Bugs that plants eat are more abundant where soil is poor. Nothing in the premise supports any kind of bug distribution other than there must be some bugs where bug eating plants are thriving. Targets assumption: oh, there must be a lot of bugs if that's how theyre getting their minerals.

  B. Bug eating plants live only in soil that is too poor to support other plants. Also not supported. We only know that they can live in poorer soil. Targets assumption of a dichotomy - poor soil - bug eaters/good soil - non-bug eaters.

  C. Minerals required by plants that don't eat bugs are more likely to be found in poor soil than minerals required by bug eating plants. Word salady answer. Maybe targets assumption: no non-bug eaters, so they don't use up all of those certain minerals? But they require the same minerals per stimulus.

  D. Bug eating plants thrive in a greater number of environments than non-bug eaters. We don't have any indication of this. We only know that they can thrive in soils that other plants can't. Targets assumption: bug eating plants can thrive in someplace non-bug eaters can't so they can thrive on at least one more environment.

  E. Bug eaters get minerals from bugs they eat. Prephrase. They require the same minerals, but plants that eat bugs can live where minerals are too scarce to sustain non-bug eaters. That they are getting some minerals from bugs is most supported.

  @Linguini said:
  I don't understand why the answer to this is not D. It says in the prompt that insectivorous plants can survive in soils that are too low in minerals for non-insectivorous plants. Is the issue the word "different"? Insectivorous can survive in at least 1 more environment, (low in soil minerals) than non-insectivorous. I see why E is the answer but I want to know the reason for eliminating D.

  This is the assumption they are baiting you to make. We don't know that insectivorous plants would survive everywhere non-insectivorous plants would. Maybe they end up with too much minerals and die? Maybe mineral content isn't the only factor that determine soil viability? Maybe soil viability isn't the only factor that determines suitability of environment? Do all insectivorous plants/non-insectivorous plants have the same environmental requirements? Lots we don't know. I think it would help to focus on just what the stimulus is giving you in those two sentences, and resist making any additional assumptions. E is not airtight either, but D just requires too many assumptions. Most strongly supported.

  Hope that helps!
• 1 Like

  LOWERCASE EVERYTHING Member ⭐

  November 2020 edited November 2020 1952 karma

  i think d is tempting, because it is compatible with the information in the stimulus but is actually not supported by the information, thus making this answer choice wrong. this mss question from the older test feels kinda unique too - it's like a paradox question.

  the issue with d is not the word "different." the issue is that we just don't know anything about how many different environments are out there for each plants to thrive in.

  for example, maybe insectivorous plants only thrive in only one environment: quicksand, while non-insectivorous plants thrive in 100 different environments - tundra, grasslands, rainforests, jungles.....
• 2 Likes

  LOWERCASE EVERYTHING Member ⭐

  November 2020 edited November 2020 1952 karma

  the words "different environments" in answer choice d are pretty ambiguous; like what i think you're saying, they can mean "soils that are too low in minerals." but it can also mean different environments like tundra, deserts, grasslands, rainforests, hot/cold places, etc.

  ultimately, we just don't know, so we definitely do not know if # of insectivorous environments > # of non-insect environments.

  even if we say that answer choice d was only talking about "soils that are too low in minerals." well, then, you'll be bringing in an unwarranted assumption like @canihazJD said above: "bug eating plants can thrive in someplace non-bug eaters can't so they can thrive on at least one more environment."

  hope this helps!
• Help2222 Member

  November 2020 240 karma

  The problem with 'D' is that we don't know if it's true. So it's not a most strongly supported from the stimulus. Hope this helps.
• canihazJD Alum Member Sage ⭐

  November 2020 8318 karma

  @Help2222 said:
  The problem with 'D' is that we don't know if it's true. So it's not a most strongly supported from the stimulus. Hope this helps.

  I don't mean to call you out, but I want to point out that in a MSS this is typically true of every answer to include the correct one. I get what you're saying, and this would probably be a viable strategy for most MSS questions. But level 4/5 MSS will capitalize on this approach by making the most strongly supported answer a very weak one... obviously not proven by the stimulus, but still better than the rest.

  In this instance, we also don't know that bugs do in fact provide the missing minerals either. Maybe they provide something else that allows the plants to survive on the minimal minerals available in the soil. Its right because it sucks the least.

  Again not trying to call you out and apologies if it comes off that way, but I think this is a dangerous assumption that LSAC will punish you for on curve breakers.