#10 - One adaptation that enables an animal species to

[Administrator]

Please post your questions below! Thank you!

[turtles919]

Hi, could you please explain to me why C is right, as opposed to A? It seems to me that C contradicts a premise in the stimulus ("black-and-white coloration that seems unlikely to provide effective camouflage"). The stimulus doesn't specify that the black/white coloration is an opinion made by a human - I was reading it as a fact. A seemed correct to me because it would provide an alternative explanation for their survival (more populous as opposed to the ability to camoflauge).

[Francis O'Rourke]

The stimulus tells us that an effective camouflage can allow a species to survive in the face of predation.

On the other hand, there are some species that have a black and white coloration and no other means to counter predators. The stimulus also tells us that a black and white coloration seems unlikely to be effective. The wording here leaves open the possibility that it is actually effective, but in a way that we can't clearly see.

The issue is how these species that have a seemingly bad countermeasure to predators can survive. Since we know that they have no other means to counter predation, there must be something about the black and white camouflage that is actually effective.

Answer choice (C) gives us this resolution. Although it can seem ineffective to us humans who see more than just black and white, a black and white color pattern can effectively camouflage against a predator that can only see in black and white.

Answer choice (A) tells us that most species with a black and white coloration are more populous than the predators that prey upon them. This may deepen the paradox. Since we needed to resolve how they survive despite a seemingly poor camouflage, learning that there are a lot of them would only make us more confused: not only do they survive, but they flourish!?

[Michaeltinti22]

I chose C, although on BR I was really, really tempted by E. Both AC make me uncomfortable, in that you need to make a few assumptions for them to fit (at least in my mind). For C.) you need to assume that those predators perceive color and pattern in a such way that black and white coloration is a somewhat effective camouflage, instead of their vision only being marginally different from our own. For E.) you need to assume that 1.) it is not only less of a liability at night, but in fact a benefit, and 2.) that these animals are nocturnal, and thus can actually benefit from the camouflage when they're awake and active. Is E incorrect because you need to assume more? The "not as great a liability" is what really scared me away in the end.

[Brook Miscoski]

Michael,

My understanding is that you eliminated B/D confidently and want to be sure you chose from A/C/E using a sound approach. Your intuition that you should not have to fill in too many blanks for the right choice is spot on, although there are some other things to notice.

You can make an argument that A makes too many assumptions, but there is a better way. Look carefully at the stimulus. We are told that there are "no other adaptations," so having a large population so that some survive predation isn't something we are permitted to consider. Without that detail in the stimulus, it would not be possible to choose between A and C.

The same doesn't apply to E. E is wrong because it construes black-white coloration as a liability at all times. It's not as great at night, but it's still always a liability according to E. Thus, E makes the paradox worse.

C is best because it suggests that there may be no problem with those markings. Perhaps predators are confused by them even though humans wouldn't be. You're right that it isn't proof, but it's the only plausible choice.

[T.B.Justin]

Hey PS,

Thank you for your insight in explaining that the stimulus allows for the possibility that black-and-white coloration is an effective camouflage - I missed that.

[iarzir2020]

Wait - I'm confused by the point that the "no adaptations" facet of the stem helps us cancel A out. How is having a large population an adaptation? And doesn't the fact that they are populous help explain why they "have endured" - because there's a lot of them?

[Frank Peter]

Hi Iarzir,

(A) wouldn't help us to explain the paradox here, which is the fact that there are animals without effective camouflage who have endured, despite not having effective camouflage. There might be a lot of them, but that doesn't necessarily help us, because they could still potentially be preyed upon heavily (maybe their population would be twice its size if they weren't preyed upon, for example).

(C) identifies an issue that might help explain the paradox: while the black and white color pattern might seem conspicuous to human observers, predators might have different perception, which could allow the prey to blend in.

[haleynicole797]

Before I explain what helped me to pick the correct answer with about 97% certainty, I will say that I understand that outside information will not always help you on the LSAT. Also, that the stimulus should be taken as the only information you need to know to answer the question...

Butt
What helped me on this question was thinking about zebra's camouflage (they are black and white). To humans this seems to make them stand out in their environment (grasslands and woodlands of Africa). But when they are all together their seemingly ineffective camouflage, is actually quite effective against their predators. Zebra predators get confused and usually think that the pack of zebras are nothing more than the tall grass.

I applied this outside information with the stimulus and when I saw answer choice (C) I applied that the zebra's predators must not see the zebra's camouflage and coloring the same as humans do (since we humans think the zebras stand out too much for their camouflage to be effective). For the predators to think the zebras are just part of the grasslands, then maybe the predators see in black and white.

Very roundabout way of thinking.. However, this problem didn't take me very long to answer at all. Just thought I would share this weird way of how I got to the correct answer lol

[Tajadas]

I don't understand how Brook was able to interpret E as black and white coloration is always a liability, even at night. When I read E, "Black-and-white coloration is not as great a liability against predators at night as it is during the day.", I took that to mean that it was possible that black and white coloration is not a liability at night at all. If black and white color made liability = 0 at night, black and white color it would still be not as great a liability as during the day.

I eliminated C because I thought "in the same manner as humans do" could mean better or worse than a human. If the predators cannot easily distinguish black and white, the answer would be correct. If they see even better than humans, it wouldn't.

At the end of the day I felt like I had to choose between two answers that required big assumptions in order to be true. What is it about the assumptions that make C a better answer than E?