mark解释！！
不是因果，而是枚举推理（百分比陷阱）。前提中的“45 percent”是重要信息点。
OG对D的解释：This suggests that even if the proportion of Canatrians eating at fast-food restaurants declines, the total number doing so may not decline. Thus, the total demand for and profitability of fast-food restaurants may not decline either, so the total number of fast-food restaurants in Canatria may not decrease.
显然，“proportion”和“total number”也证明了推理模式为枚举推理（百分比陷阱）。
1、本身有专门的名词形式的比动名词更好。2、you can't use 'resulting from' as an adverbial modifier, as is done here. in general, 'resulting from' is only used as an adjective modifier, almost always without a comma, as in
the pollution resulting from the chemical spill forced all the local residents to evacuate.（by Ron）
because of身后的enhancing reproduction or survival是动名词短语，而动名词是没有“逻辑主语”的。但在本题中，被favor的必须是the products of natural selection，即，are favored在本题中必须有逻辑主语，否则无法满足语境中给出的逻辑关系。
我觉得可能可以通过It has been known for some time that outside the bright nucleus of a typical spiral galaxy luminosity falls off rapidly with distance from the center.这句话来认为题中的nucleus事实上就是在spiral galaxy的中心？题目其实就是在讲galaxy的外围和中心的比较？（而且第二段的篇幅大概都在讲这个，做题时没理解就蒙是在讲这段的结论了....
扫描二维码，直接登录
还是不懂。就算是根据过去几年平均量之类的设置的quota，那已经预期到将会有quota限制，文中没有说到底几年后会有quota，万一就是明年限制呢？那今年增加了耕种岂不是就惨了。如果等个三五年再限制，那这三五年倒是可以增加耕种。所以不知道未来哪年限制的情况下，怎么可以判断增加耕种可以？