#20 - Some flowering plant species, entirely dependent on

[ob00x7]

Hey, would anyone be able to help me with a couple of problems. In in lr for the feb 94 sec. 4., I am having trouble with question 20, once again why is E right and B is wrong. Any help will be greatly appreciated and thanks in advance.

[Nikki Siclunov]

Hello ob00x7,

Thanks for your question. To help you better, can you clarify how you approached this problem? How did you break down the stimulus, and why did you choose answer choice (B) over (E)? The more we know about your thought process, the better we can help you out.

Thanks!

[ob00x7]

Hey for this one i am just having troubling setting it up i am not sure what it is but i just don't think my set up for it is correct and the more i look at it the more confused i get. I can understand why E is correct and B is not but, i was wondering how you would set this problem up? Would B be wrong because it says that of the pollinator of a species is no danger of being extinct then the plant it pollinates is UNLIKELY to become extinct. Is unlikely to strong because maybe some other element could cause the plant to become extinct or is this assumption unwarranted. Again thank you very much for the help.

[Nikki Siclunov]

You're on the right track. Let's focus on the following two conditional statements in the stimulus:

1. Often the pollinating species (i.e. bees) can pollinate only a single species of plant. In other words, some bees depend on a single species of plant:

Bee species (x) Plant species (x)

2. Some plant species have evolved flowers that only a single species of bees can pollinate. In other words, some plants depend on a single species of bees:

Plant species (y) Bee species (y)

The last sentence tells us what happens when bee species (y) gets destroyed: plant species (y) can no longer reproduce. This is the contrapositive of the second statement above. The same thing will happen if plant species (x) is destroyed: bee species (x) will not survive either. Since (x) simply stands for "some" plant species, answer choice (E) can easily be proven by the contrapositive of the first conditional statement above.

Answer choice (B) is a Mistaken Reversal: just because the sole pollinator of some plant species (bee species [y]), is thriving doesn't mean that plant species (y) will thrive as well. The plants can be destroyed by some other means (pesticides, infections, etc.) even if their only pollinator is doing OK. Makes sense?

Thanks!

[Mi Kal]

Hi,

As Nikki stated

Answer choice (B) is a Mistaken Reversal: just because the sole pollinator of some plant species (bee species [y]), is thriving doesn't mean that plant species (y) will thrive as well. The plants can be destroyed by some other means (pesticides, infections, etc.) even if their only pollinator is doing OK. Makes sense?

I don't see how it is a Mistaken Reversal.

Also, the reason why I thought B was right is because of "unlikely." Like Nikki mentioned above about the other possibilities, doesn't "unlikely" leave the door open for other possibilities? Isn't "total destruction" in E way too strong? And doesn't it make sense that if the "sole pollinator" (the bee) is not in danger than the plant is "unlikely" to be in danger and vice versa? Conversely, if the "sole pollinator" (the bee) is in danger than the plant is likely to be in danger and vice versa?

Thanks.

Michael

[nicholaspavic]

Hi Michael,

Answer (E) does not overstate the conclusion that "If careless applications of pesticides destroy the pollinating bee species, the plant species itself can no longer reproduce." That is strong language that will be mimicked in the correct answer choice which is why (E) is correct.

With respect to the confusion about what the stimulus is stating, note that Nikki is making a distinction between the species of bee (say North American Bumble bee) that is dependent on one kind of flower (say Lilies) and the species of flowers (say Roses) that are dependent on a totally different species of bee (say African honey bee). In other words, I think you may be misreading the stimulus to be only one type of bee and one type of flower which does give you bee species plant species. So if you read it that way, then you are making an undue inference that they are all the same.

Thanks and I hope this helps!

[Mi Kal]

Hey Nicholas.

Got it.

Thanks.

Michael

[harvoolio]

I am still a little confused about B versus E.

I had the contrapositive of (B) as "If the plant species the bee pollinates is not unlikely to become extinct, then the sole pollinator of a certain plant is not in no danger of extinction." Removing the double-negatives it would read "If the plant species the bee pollinates is likely to become extinct, then the sole pollinator of a certain plant is in danger of extinction." How is this different than (E)?

Thanks in advance for helping me sort through this.

[Daniel Stern]

The stimulus sets up two absolute relationships: some types of bees can only pollinate specific types of plants, respectively; and some types of plants can only be pollinated by one kind of bee. The stimulus then goes on to state the absolute implications of that for one of two hypothetical situations: the elimination of a uniquely adapted species of bee by pesticide leading to the death of the plant species that bee species has adapted to pollinate.

Answer E sums up the implications of the other hypothetical situation: the elimination of one of the uniquely adapted plant species, leading to the death of its associated bee species.

Answer B, as Nikki stated above, is a mistaken reversal: the absence of a threat to one side of the relationship does not mean that there is no threat, possibly from a completely different source, to the other side.

I hope this helps.
Dan

[whardy21]

I chose B. I categorized E as a loser based on believing it was a reverse answer. The last sentence of the stimulus states the opposite in which plants species will no longer be able to reproduce. Please explain why B is wrong and why answer E is correct. Thanks.