#3 - Insectivorous plants, which unlike other plants have

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Must Be True. The correct answer choice is (E)

Even though insectivorous (insect-eating) and non-insectivorous plants have virtually the same the mineral requirements, the former can thrive in soils that are too poor in minerals to support the latter. Do not get distracted by the unfamiliar language used in the stimulus — this is just meant to delay you and has no bearing on your ability to answer the question.

Since this is an ordinary fact-set stimulus and not an argument, the hypothesis we are asked to formulate will probably require us to put the facts together in some meaningful way. A good way to start would be to speculate what would enable insectivorous plants to survive in soils whose mineral content is too low for other plants to thrive in. The most obvious explanation — that insectivorous plants simply have lower mineral content requirements — is explicitly rejected by the author. Logically, then, insectivorous must be getting their minerals from some other source. Given that the only difference between insectivorous and non-insectivorous plants is their food source, the most likely explanation for the phenomenon presented in the stimulus would be that insectivorous plants can get the minerals they require from the insects they ingest. The hypothesis presented in answer choice (E) is therefore most likely to be correct.

Answer choice (A): While the abundance of insects in areas where the soil is poor in minerals might explain why insectivorous plants can thrive there, insects do not need to be especially abundant there — they merely need to compensate for the diminished mineral content of the soil. Even though answer choice (A) is compatible with the facts presented in the stimulus, it cannot be proven by them.

Answer choice (B): We have no reason to believe that insectivorous plants thrive only in soils that are too poor in minerals to support other plants. This answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (C): Because the stimulus explicitly stated that the two types of plants have virtually the same mineral requirements, this answer choice is incorrect.

Answer choice (D): At first, this may seem like an attractive answer choice. Indeed, insectivorous plants thrive in soils that are unsuitable for other plants, which increases the potential number of different environments in which they thrive. However, it is perfectly possible that some other environments are more suitable for non-insectivorous plants than for insectivorous ones: imagine an environment whose soil is rich in minerals but that lacks an abundance of insects. Even though answer choice (D) is compatible with the facts presented in the stimulus, it is too broad to be proven by them.

Answer choice (E): This is the correct answer choice. See discussion above.

[ebgordo2]

I was suspicious about circling (E), the correct answer, because I thought it may be illegitimate to infer that minerals may be derived from the insects that insectivorous plants consume. The reason I thought this to be illegitimate was that the stimulus did not explicitly state that minerals can be found in insects. I understand that intuitively, this inference can be made. But, I thought I remembered reading in the LR Bible that correct MBT answers don't provide new information. And I interpreted the derivation of minerals from insects as new information.

[Adam Tyson]

The key here is that the stem is a Most Strongly Supported, ebgordo2, and not a full-blow Must Be True. We generally treat these as a subset of Must Be True, so your confusion is understandable.

Think of the difference between a Strengthen question and a Justify the Conclusion question, where one answer helps and the other proves the conclusion. A Must Be True is like a Justify question, where the stimulus proves the correct answer, but a Most Strongly Supported is like a Strengthen question, where the stimulus helps the correct answer. It needs to be a reasonable inference, based solely on the facts in the stimulus, with no outside information, but it doesn't have to be 100% proven by the stimulus.

Finally, remember the instructions - you are to select the BEST answer from among the five answer choices provided, even if it is less then perfect. None of the other answers are anywhere near as good as E! If the plants thrive in soil where other plants cannot survive, but they need the same stuff those other plants do, then they have to be getting that stuff somewhere other than from the soil. The insects just make sense.

Don't be too formal in your approach, but be flexible. Even a bad answer can be the correct answer, if it is better than all the others! For Most Strongly Supported stems, apply a slightly lower standard than for Must Be True, and you'll be much happier to select answers like E here.

[ebgordo2]

Perfect explanation! Thanks Adam!

[Mastering_LSAT]

Is it correct to assume that if the stimulus in this question did not contain the last sentence ("Yet the mineral requirements..."), the answer choice D would be correct then?

I, like many others, was struggling between the answer choice D and E. I have a feeling that the answer choice E is correct because the stimulus is focusing more on minerals required for plants to survive (especially, the last sentence "Yet the mineral requirements..."), rather than various environments where plants could survive which were mentioned but not discussed as much as minerals.

Please explain why D is incorrect, because we can reasonably infer from the stimulus that insectivorous plants could survive in more environments than non-insectivorous plants, and we cannot bring in any new information outside of the stimulus to assume that it is the other way around.

Thank you!

[Jeremy Press]

Hi Mastering LSAT,

Even if the stimulus did not contain the last sentence (and only had the first sentence), you wouldn't have the support you would need to select answer choice D. Just because insectivorous plants can thrive in some places where noninsectivorous plants can't thrive doesn't mean that insectivorous plants can thrive in all the places where noninsectivorous plants also can thrive. After all, what if insectivorous plants require insects to thrive (we don't know that this definitely is true from the stimulus, but we also don't know that isn't true)? And what if there were places in the world lacking insects but where noninsectivorous plants could thrive? And what if there were more such places in the world (places without insects, but where noninsectivorous plants can thrive)? All of this is information we don't, and can't, know from just the first sentence in the stimulus. So there's just not enough information in the stimulus to support the claim in answer choice D.

I hope this helps!