A certain cultivated herb is one of a group of closely related plants that thrive in soil with high concentrations...
GMAT Critical Reasoning : (CR) Questions
A certain cultivated herb is one of a group of closely related plants that thrive in soil with high concentrations of metals that are toxic to most other plants. Agronomists studying the growth of this herb have discovered that it produces large amounts of histidine, an amino acid that, in test-tube solutions, renders these metals chemically inert. Hence, the herb's high histidine production must be the key feature that allows it to grow in metal-rich soils.
In evaluating the argument, it would be most important to determine which of the following?
Passage Analysis:
Text from Passage | Analysis |
---|---|
A certain cultivated herb is one of a group of closely related plants that thrive in soil with high concentrations of metals that are toxic to most other plants. |
|
Agronomists studying the growth of this herb have discovered that it produces large amounts of histidine, an amino acid that, in test-tube solutions, renders these metals chemically inert. |
|
Hence, the herb's high histidine production must be the key feature that allows it to grow in metal-rich soils. |
|
Argument Flow:
The argument starts with an observation about an unusual herb that can survive in toxic soil, then presents lab evidence showing the herb produces histidine which neutralizes metals in test tubes, and finally concludes this must explain the herb's real-world survival ability.
Main Conclusion:
The herb's high histidine production must be what allows it to grow in metal-rich soils.
Logical Structure:
This is a causal argument that jumps from lab evidence (histidine neutralizes metals in test tubes) to a real-world explanation (histidine must be protecting the herb in nature). The key logical gap is assuming that what happens in a test tube also happens inside a living plant in soil.
Prethinking:
Question type:
Evaluate - We need to find what information would be most important to determine whether the conclusion is valid or not
Precision of Claims
The conclusion makes a causal claim that histidine production is THE KEY feature allowing survival in metal-rich soils, based on lab evidence that histidine neutralizes metals
Strategy
For evaluate questions, we need to think of assumptions the argument makes and create scenarios that would either strengthen or weaken the conclusion when we get more information. The argument jumps from 'histidine works in test tubes' to 'histidine must be why the herb survives in real soil.' We should look for gaps between lab conditions and real-world conditions, or alternative explanations for the herb's survival.