Scientists have made genetic modifications to cotton to increase its resistance to insect pests. According to farmers' report, the amount of insecticide needed per acre to control insect pests was only slightly lower for those who tried the modified seed than for those who did not. Therefore, since the modified seed costs more than ordinary seed without producing yields of higher market value, switching to the modified seed would be unlikely to benefit most cotton farmers economically.
Which of the following would it be most useful to know in order to evaluate the argument?
Whether farmers who tried the modified cotton seed had ever tried growing other crops from genetically modified seed.
Whether the insecticides typically used on ordinary cotton tend to be more expensive than insecticides typically used on other crops.
Whether for most farmers who grow cotton it is their primary crop.
Whether the farmers who have tried the modified seed planted as many acres of cotton, on average, as farmers using the ordinary seed did.
Whether most of the farmers who tried the modified seed did so because they had previously had to use exceptionally large quantities of insecticide.
思路只考虑了一个方向:B只考虑了新的所需农药贵,当然是不能改变现有的concl,但如果新的所需农药更便宜,那concl就不一定对了。
B的意思是是否棉花farmer用的农药要比其它农作物的农药贵,这是对题目里的farmers' report进行补充,Report只是说amount(数量)但没说价格,如果棉花的农药要比普通的贵,那基因工程省下来的那点农药所带来的economic benefit就多了。虽然削弱的程度确实很小,但相比其它无关选项,这是最能改变结论的信息了
E previously had to use exceptionally 如果改成对象为new crop 就会沾边了
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论