planktons

This topic has expert replies
Legendary Member
Posts: 2326
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2008 3:54 am
Thanked: 173 times
Followed by:2 members
GMAT Score:710

planktons

by gmatmachoman » Sun Feb 07, 2010 12:02 am
Plankton generally thrive in areas of the ocean with sufficient concentrations of certain
nitrogen compounds near the surface, where plankton live. Nevertheless, some areas,
though rich in these nitrogen compounds, have few plankton. These areas have
particularly low concentrations of iron, and oceanographers hypothesize that this shortage
of iron prevents plankton from thriving. However, an experimental release of iron
compounds into one such area failed to produce a thriving plankton population, even
though local iron concentrations increased immediately.

Which of the following, if true, argues most strongly against concluding, on the basis of
the information above, that the oceanographers' hypothesis is false?

A. Not all of the nitrogen compounds that are sometimes found in relatively high
concentrations in the oceans are nutrients for plankton.

B. Certain areas of the ocean support an abundance of plankton despite having
particularly low concentrations of iron.

C. The release of the iron compounds did not increase the supply of nitrogen
compounds in the area.

D. A few days after the iron compounds were released, ocean currents displaced the
iron-rich water from the surface.

E. The iron compounds released into the area occur naturally in areas of the ocean
where plankton thrive.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 748
Joined: Sun Jan 31, 2010 7:54 am
Thanked: 46 times
Followed by:3 members

by outreach » Sun Feb 07, 2010 12:29 am
oceanographers hypothesize that deficieny of iron causes less population of plankton despite presence of nitrogen

A. Not all of the nitrogen compounds that are sometimes found in relatively high
concentrations in the oceans are nutrients for plankton.
incorrect: this does not cor-relate with the experiment nor does support oceanographers hypothesis

B. Certain areas of the ocean support an abundance of plankton despite having
particularly low concentrations of iron.
incorrect: weakens oceanographers hypothesis

C. The release of the iron compounds did not increase the supply of nitrogen
compounds in the area.
incorrect: this questions the experiment results. Does not weaken/strengthen oceanographers hypothesis

D. A few days after the iron compounds were released, ocean currents displaced the
iron-rich water from the surface.
correct: this tells why the experiment results were incorrect and does not weaken oceanographers hypothesis

E. The iron compounds released into the area occur naturally in areas of the ocean
where plankton thrive
incorrect: this supports the experiment results and weakens oceanographers hypothesis

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 777
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 4:02 am
Location: Mumbai, India
Thanked: 117 times
Followed by:47 members

by komal » Sun Feb 07, 2010 12:37 am
gmatmachoman wrote:Plankton generally thrive in areas of the ocean with sufficient concentrations of certain
nitrogen compounds near the surface, where plankton live. Nevertheless, some areas,
though rich in these nitrogen compounds, have few plankton. These areas have
particularly low concentrations of iron, and oceanographers hypothesize that this shortage
of iron prevents plankton from thriving. However, an experimental release of iron
compounds into one such area failed to produce a thriving plankton population, even
though local iron concentrations increased immediately.

Which of the following, if true, argues most strongly against concluding, on the basis of
the information above, that the oceanographers' hypothesis is false?


Question asks us to find the answer that suggests oceangrapher's hypothesis is NOT FALSE. This means 4 answer choices will conclude that Oceanographer's hypothesis is FALSE and 1 answer choice will support his claim. Lets see which one does that for us :

A. Not all of the nitrogen compounds that are sometimes found in relatively high concentrations in the oceans are nutrients for plankton.
Incorrect : This is irrelevant to the oceanographer's hypothesis that shortage of iron prevents plankton from thriving. Hence this answer choice is ruled out.

B. Certain areas of the ocean support an abundance of plankton despite having particularly low concentrations of iron.
Incorrect : This implied that oceanographer's hypothesis is false. Eliminated.

C. The release of the iron compounds did not increase the supply of nitrogen compounds in the area.
Incorrect : It is not the deficiency of nitrogen compounds that is the issue here. Eliminated.

D. A few days after the iron compounds were released, ocean currents displaced the iron-rich water from the surface.
Correct : This supports the oceanographer's hypothesis by stating that iron-rich water was displaced from the surface after two days and the planktons dint get a chance to thrive in iron rich water.

E. The iron compounds released into the area occur naturally in areas of the ocean where plankton thrive.
Incorrect : Natural or artificial occurrence of iron compounds is not an issue here. Eliminated.
Hope this helps : )

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 105
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 6:07 pm
Thanked: 3 times
Followed by:1 members

by mmon » Sun Feb 07, 2010 11:22 pm
IMO A. Oceanographers hypothesized that "lack of irons" is the reason for plankton not thriving where there are enough Nitro. now after releasing irons which reached optimum level IMMEDIATELY if still plankton did not thrive we need to find other reason for the failure of hypothesis - i.e. A (tells based on which fact the hypothesis was made does not encompass all - new findings )
in D , why to wait for days ? out of scope, what if plankton just takes in hours or minutes to thrive at the right environment.

Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by ssgmatter » Tue May 11, 2010 9:01 am
I am still not clear on A.......Any takers???

Thanks!
Best-
Amit

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 613
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 6:17 am
Location: madrid
Thanked: 171 times
Followed by:64 members
GMAT Score:790

by kevincanspain » Tue May 11, 2010 9:56 am
ssgmatter wrote:I am still not clear on A.......Any takers???

Thanks!
What is the oceanographers' hypothesis?
Kevin Armstrong
GMAT Instructor
Gmatclasses
Madrid

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 109
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 4:58 am
Thanked: 12 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:720

by jeffedwards » Tue May 11, 2010 10:56 am
ssgmatter wrote:I am still not clear on A.......Any takers???

Thanks!

A is not correct because this information is already taken into account in the explanation.

"plankton thrive in areas of the ocean with sufficient concentrations of certain
nitrogen compounds"

The statement then says that there was "an experimental release of iron
compounds into one such area" on such area is referring to a place where these certain nitrogen compounds are.

So regardless if not all nitrogen compounds are food for plankton, the compounds in the test are, so statement A is irrelevant.

Does that help?

Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by ssgmatter » Thu May 13, 2010 6:24 am
kevincanspain wrote:
ssgmatter wrote:I am still not clear on A.......Any takers???

Thanks!
What is the oceanographers' hypothesis?
\

Oceanographer hypothesis:Shortage of iron prevents the spreading of plankton.

Let me share my thought process on optoin A: Since not all nitrogen compounds are nutirents for plankton so I am thinking that Iron would be the one for the planton to thrive but since the iron is missing so that is the reason that could weaken the hypothesis...

Please share your thoughts
Best-
Amit

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:55 am
Thanked: 12 times

by nikhilkatira » Wed May 19, 2010 4:11 am
gmatmachoman wrote:Plankton generally thrive in areas of the ocean with sufficient concentrations of certain
nitrogen compounds near the surface, where plankton live. Nevertheless, some areas,
though rich in these nitrogen compounds, have few plankton. These areas have
particularly low concentrations of iron, and oceanographers hypothesize that this shortage
of iron prevents plankton from thriving. However, an experimental release of iron
compounds into one such area failed to produce a thriving plankton population, even
though local iron concentrations increased immediately.

Which of the following, if true, argues most strongly against concluding, on the basis of
the information above, that the oceanographers' hypothesis is false?

A. Not all of the nitrogen compounds that are sometimes found in relatively high
concentrations in the oceans are nutrients for plankton.

B. Certain areas of the ocean support an abundance of plankton despite having
particularly low concentrations of iron.

C. The release of the iron compounds did not increase the supply of nitrogen
compounds in the area.

D. A few days after the iron compounds were released, ocean currents displaced the
iron-rich water from the surface.

E. The iron compounds released into the area occur naturally in areas of the ocean
where plankton thrive.

IMO...C

OA pls??
Best,
Nikhil H. Katira

User avatar
Community Manager
Posts: 1048
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2009 3:26 am
Location: India
Thanked: 51 times
Followed by:27 members
GMAT Score:670

by arora007 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 10:11 am
IMO D, OA -D :)
https://www.skiponemeal.org/
https://twitter.com/skiponemeal
Few things are impossible to diligence & skill.Great works are performed not by strength,but by perseverance

pm me if you find junk/spam/abusive language, Lets keep our community clean!!

Legendary Member
Posts: 995
Joined: Tue Apr 13, 2010 11:56 pm
Thanked: 31 times
Followed by:1 members

by paes » Tue Jul 27, 2010 6:29 pm
gmatmachomal,

Please post the question properly, I mean without unnecessary line-breaking, It creates a problem while reading the argument.