Plankton generally thrive in areas of the ocean with sufficient concentrations of certain nitrogen compounds near the surface, where plankton live. Nevertheless, some areas, though rich in these nitrogen compounds, have few plankton. These areas have particularly low concentrations of iron, and oceanographers hypothesize that this shortage of iron prevents plankton from thriving. However, an experimental release of iron compounds into one such area failed to produce a thriving plankton population, even though local iron concentrations increased immediately.
Which of the following, if true, argues most strongly against concluding, on the basis of the information above, that the oceanographers' hypothesis is false?
Not all of the nitrogen compounds that are sometimes found in relatively high concentrations in the oceans are nutrients for plankton.
Certain areas of the ocean support an abundance of plankton despite having particularly low concentrations of iron.
The release of the iron compounds did not increase the supply of nitrogen compounds in the area.
A few days after the iron compounds were released, ocean currents displaced the iron-rich water from the surface.
The iron compounds released into the area occur naturally in areas of the ocean where plankton thrive.
又是一个问题比逻辑本身还绕的...
Which of the following(, if true, )argues most strongly against concluding(, on the basis of the information above, )that the oceanographers' hypothesis is false?
以下哪一个说法最强烈的反对了文中(grapher的猜想是错的)的这个concluding
也就是说 文中的结论是:grapher的猜想是错的==》即增加iron不能解决问题//或者问题不是出在iron的shortage上
选项要做的事情是反驳,就是说要么给出另一个证据证明就是iron的问题,要么指出这个实验是有问题的(比如并没有实际补充了iron)
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论