Hey Guys, not the quietest question by far...
Lyme disease is caused by a bacterium transmitted to humans by deer ticks. Generally, deer ticks pick up the bacterium while in the larval stage by feeding on infected white-footed mice. However, certain other species on which the larvae feed do not harbor the bacterium. If the population of these other species were increased, more of the larvae would be feeding on uninfected hosts, so the number of ticks acquiring the bacterium would likely decline.
Which of the following would it be most important to ascertain in evaluating the argument?
"¢whether populations of other species on which deer tick larvae feed are found only in areas also inhabited by white-footed mice.
"¢whether the size of the deer tick population is currently limited by the availability of animal for the ticks' larval stage to feed on.
"¢whether the infected deer tick populations could be controlled by increasing the number of animals that prey on white-footed mice.
"¢whether deer ticks that were not infected as larvae can become infected as adults by feeding on deer on which infected deer ticks have fed
"¢whether the other species on which deer tick larvae feed harbor any other bacteria that sticks transmit to humans
I can easily discard options; 1,3 and 4. But I don't see why argument 2 is stronger than 5. Any advice?
Many thanks
Lukas
Lyme Diseas
This topic has expert replies
-
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2014 6:56 am
- Followed by:1 members
GMAT/MBA Expert
- ceilidh.erickson
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2095
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:22 pm
- Thanked: 1443 times
- Followed by:247 members
With CR questions, pay particular attention to any arguments that involve the conflation of NUMBERS and PROPORTIONS.
Premises:
- deer ticks pick up the bacterium while in the larval stage by feeding on infected white-footed mice
- certain other species on which the larvae feed do not harbor the bacterium
Conclusion:
- If the population of these other species were increased, more of the larvae would be feeding on uninfected hosts, so the number of ticks acquiring the bacterium would likely decline.
Logical Gap:
- We're assuming that if the NUMBER of other food-species increased, then the PROPORTION of infested food supply would decrease, and thus the NUMBER of infected ticks would decrease. But what if increasing the food supply merely increased the total population of ticks? We might have the same number of infested ticks, even if the proportion of the tick population was smaller.
We need to evaluate: will the overall size of the tick population change?
A. These populations don't need to be found ONLY in areas inhabited by white-footed mice. They just need to share some area, so the ticks could potentially feed on both.
B. Whether the tick population is currently limited by food supply will directly affect whether the overall population will change. Correct!
C. This is outside of the scope of the argument. The cause-effect relationship we care about is: increasing non-white-footed-mouse food -> smaller number of infected ticks.
D. The chronology of infection is irrelevant.
E. This argument only deals with Lyme disease bacterium. "Any other bacteria" is outside of the scope of the argument.
Premises:
- deer ticks pick up the bacterium while in the larval stage by feeding on infected white-footed mice
- certain other species on which the larvae feed do not harbor the bacterium
Conclusion:
- If the population of these other species were increased, more of the larvae would be feeding on uninfected hosts, so the number of ticks acquiring the bacterium would likely decline.
Logical Gap:
- We're assuming that if the NUMBER of other food-species increased, then the PROPORTION of infested food supply would decrease, and thus the NUMBER of infected ticks would decrease. But what if increasing the food supply merely increased the total population of ticks? We might have the same number of infested ticks, even if the proportion of the tick population was smaller.
We need to evaluate: will the overall size of the tick population change?
A. These populations don't need to be found ONLY in areas inhabited by white-footed mice. They just need to share some area, so the ticks could potentially feed on both.
B. Whether the tick population is currently limited by food supply will directly affect whether the overall population will change. Correct!
C. This is outside of the scope of the argument. The cause-effect relationship we care about is: increasing non-white-footed-mouse food -> smaller number of infected ticks.
D. The chronology of infection is irrelevant.
E. This argument only deals with Lyme disease bacterium. "Any other bacteria" is outside of the scope of the argument.
Ceilidh Erickson
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education
GMAT/MBA Expert
- ceilidh.erickson
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 2095
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 3:22 pm
- Thanked: 1443 times
- Followed by:247 members
The NUMBER v. PROPORTION flaw is a very common type of logical flaw on CR. For more examples, see:
https://www.beatthegmat.com/i-m-doubting ... tml#551227
https://www.beatthegmat.com/cr-evaluate- ... tml#558393
https://www.beatthegmat.com/total-books- ... tml#680834
https://www.beatthegmat.com/statistics-c ... tml#564609
https://www.beatthegmat.com/i-m-doubting ... tml#551227
https://www.beatthegmat.com/cr-evaluate- ... tml#558393
https://www.beatthegmat.com/total-books- ... tml#680834
https://www.beatthegmat.com/statistics-c ... tml#564609
Ceilidh Erickson
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education
EdM in Mind, Brain, and Education
Harvard Graduate School of Education
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 426
- Joined: Tue Aug 22, 2017 8:48 pm
- Followed by:1 members
I believed it is letter B
Deer tick larvae is not part of the argument that's why B is reliable than E. Is my statement correct?
Deer tick larvae is not part of the argument that's why B is reliable than E. Is my statement correct?