ashish2104 wrote:Even I have same doubt.

C says: sloth that was found in Puerto Rico in 1991, was dated at 34 million years old, making this the earliest known mammal of

I think the bolded was should be 'were' to match plural fossils
The preious 'was' usage is correct as the subject of relative clause introduced is sloth(singular)

niksworth wrote:

ashish2104 wrote:Even I have same doubt.

C says: sloth that was found in Puerto Rico in 1991, was dated at 34 million years old, making this the earliest known mammal of

I think the bolded was should be 'were' to match plural fossils
The preious 'was' usage is correct as the subject of relative clause introduced is sloth(singular)

Ashish,
If the subject of the relative clause is sloth, then it effectively means that the sloth was found in 1991 and not fossils. (Fossils of the arm of a sloth, that was found in Puerto Rico in 1991..) That wouldn't make much sense, would it?

clammiestqasar wrote:Fossils of the arm of a sloth found in Puerto Rico in 1991, and dated at 34 million years old, made it the earliest known mammal of the Greater Antilles islands.

A. sloth found in Puerto Rico in 1991, and dated at 34 million years old, made it the earliest known mammal of
B. sloth, that they found in Puerto Rico in 1991, has been dated at 34 million years old, thus making it the earliest mammal known on
C. sloth that was found in Puerto Rico in 1991, was dated at 34 million years old, making this the earliest known mammal of
D. sloth, found in Puerto Rico in 1991, have been dated at 34 million years old, making the sloth the earliest known mammal on
E. sloth which, found in Puerto Rico in 1991, was dated at 34 million years old, made the sloth the earliest known mammal of

OA is C but I thought it was D.
Please Help.