Supported, because in P3, the author tells us that plots that still had T-mites controlled C-mites more effectively than plots in which T-mites were killed. If, as the question stem asks, we use a pesticide that slows C-mite reproduction and doesn’t kill T-mites, then T-mites would exist in every group of plants. So C-mites would be controlled everywhere.

Not supported, because if T-mites aren’t in a plot, C-mites aren’t as effectively controlled compared ot when T-mites are present. So we’d expect more C-mites in plots without T-mites.

Not supported, because the synchrony would still exist. If C-mites populations are low, then T-mite populations would remain low. That’s still synchrony, even if C-mite populations never get higher.

Not supported, because if C-mite reproduction is slowed in the treated plots, we have no reason to think T-mite population would eventually increase. The population would remain synchronous with the C-mite population.

Not supported, because in the treated plots, if the pesticide doesn’t kill T-mites, then the T-mites would keep the C-mites under control.