#12 - A lichen is made up of a photosynthetic organism and a

[Administrator]

Please post your questions below! Thank you!

[studyhelp20]

Dear Power Score Help,

Can you please explain the correct answer to this question? Also, can you please provide this question's categorization? Thanks in advance

Sincerely,
Brennan

[Adam Tyson]

This is a Most Strongly Supported question Brennan, which is a subset of the Must Be True type (just a little "softer," meaning the correct answer need not be 100% proven by the stimulus, but is still supported by the facts in the stimulus without any outside information being required).

We'll get a more complete official explanation up soon, but the short answer is that the stimulus tells us that lichens are vulnerable to toxic compounds, including (but not necessarily limited to) those found in polluted air. So if you have a lot of pollution in the air, lichens could suffer from those toxins.

Notice how soft answer E is? It's not that lichens will definitely have problems, or that they will die, but only that the pollution could cause problems for them. The stimulus certainly provides some reason for us to believe that could happen!

[LSAT2HARD]

Then why C is wrong? C is also very soft.

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi LSAT2HARD,

The problem with answer choice (C) is that it requires assuming facts that were not given. We know that the toxins are harmful to the lichen, but do we know that they have any impact on the lichen's density in a region? Maybe the harm is in their inability to produce bright colors. Or maybe the toxins are harmful to growth, but don't make it impossible for the lichen to exist. Also, it's only some species of lichen that are vulnerable. The toxin in the air shouldn't impact the lichen that aren't susceptible to toxins.

But mostly, LSAT2HARD, it's because we don't have the facts to support answer choice (C).

Hope that helps!

[mkarimi73]

Doesn't (E) imply ALL lichens when it says "Serious air pollution in a region can cause problems for lichens." It is my understanding that when the LSAT refers to a blanket statement such as "lichens," it implies ALL lichens. Shouldn't they have added a quantifier here, such as "some" or "certain"?

I recognize that Most Strongly Supported questions are a matter of process of elimination and pre-phrases, in addition to knowing what they are testing. It seems that they are testing students' understanding of causal relationships on this question, correct?

[Jeff Wren]

Hi mkarimi73,

Here, Answer (E) doesn't imply ALL lichens.

When used without a modifier, a plural term should be read as "some."

For example, if I say "Dogs like peanut butter" I'm referring to dogs in general, but not implying ALL dogs like peanut butter, which would be a much stronger claim.

I agree that it would have been helpful for the test makers to use a modifier like "some," but unfortunately, they don't always accommodate us.