扫描二维码，直接登录
题库 / GMATLA-CR-80
Which of the following most logically completes the argument below?
The expansion of large-scale farming in Africa and Asia has destroyed much of the natural vegetation on which elephants have historically depended, forcing them to turn to cultivated land to satisfy their enormous appetites. As a result, farmers have lost millions of dollars worth of crops annually. Yet even if elephant sanctuaries were created on a widespread basis to guarantee elephants sufficient natural vegetation, the raiding would likely persist, since .
when elephants forage for food, they typically travel in herds.
Foraging elephants have been known to cause substantial damage even to plants that they do not eat.
Some of the land where crops have suffered extensive damage from elephants has been allowed to return to its natural state.
Elephants tend to prefer cultivated crops to wild vegetation as a food source.
Elephant sanctuaries are usually created in areas that are rich in the natural vegetation on which elephants have historically depended.
B.大象会破坏它们不吃的植物
如果B成立需要证明：
1. 吃庇护所的植物的路上或附近会经过庄稼地，即需要证明大象破坏的是庄稼
2. persist 说明是和之前一致的行为，之前是吃庄稼现在只踩着玩，并不是一个连续行为
B选项这个事实在大规模工业化之前已经存在，题中最后的weird的解释一定是“大象吃庄稼”这个事实带来了什么样的后果，转折点在“大象吃庄稼”
choice a,当大象觅食的时候，它们成群结队出行。-> 没法解释为什么明明提供了自然植物，会继续去吃庄稼
choice b, 进食中的大象对它们不感兴趣的植物也造成破坏。irrelevant
choice d, 比起自然植物，大象更喜欢将农作物当食物。correct
计划：大象庇护所的建立可以提供足够多的植物给他们吃
结论：计划无效，袭击还是会发生
B．袭击还会继续因为即使大象不吃庄稼了依旧来回跑破坏。
D 比起野生植物，大象更加喜欢庄稼。
两个选项都会导致破坏
在看下结论：the raiding would likely persist. 这里的raiding袭击指的是大象吃庄稼造成的农民伯伯的损失惨重。
B不吃庄稼肯定比还要吃的损失小，应该不能构成raiding
D题目中说是农业扩张了，以前大象没有吃过庄稼，吃过后发现他们prefer庄稼than野生植物，即使有了庇护所，他们依旧会像以前一样。
D
B虽然也描述了大象的破坏性，但是感觉跟题目的逻辑链没什么关系呀，反观D解释了有庇护所之后大象仍然出去吃种植的粮食的原因登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
所以D选项，大象更喜欢吃种植的庄稼而不是野生的植物，刚弥补了前面的缺陷。