There are recent reports of apparently drastic declines in amphibian populations and of extinctions of a number of the world's endangered amphibian species. These declines, if real, may be signs of a general trend toward extinction, and many environmentalists have claimed that immediate environmental action is necessary to remedy this "amphibian crisis," which, in their view, is an indicator of general and catastrophic environmental degradation due to human activity.
To evaluate these claims, it is useful to make a preliminary distinction that is far too often ignored. A declining population should not be confused with an endangered one. An endangered population is always rare, almost always small, and, by definition, under constant threat of extinction even without a proximate cause in human activities. Its disappearance, however unfortunate, should come as no great surprise. Moreover, chance events—which may indicate nothing about the direction of trends in population size—may lead to its extinction. The probability of extinction due to such random factors depends on the population size and is independent of the prevailing direction of change in that size.
For biologists, population declines are potentially more worrisome than extinctions. Persistent declines, especially in large populations, indicate a changed ecological context. Even here, distinctions must again be made among declines that are only apparent (in the sense that they are part of habitual cycles or of normal fluctuations), declines that take a population to some lower but still acceptable level, and those that threaten extinction (e.g., by taking the number of individuals below the minimum viable population). Anecdotal reports of population decreases cannot distinguish among these possibilities, and some amphibian populations have shown strong fluctuations in the past.
It is indisputably true that there is simply not enough long-term scientific data on amphibian populations to enable researchers to identify real declines in amphibian populations. Many fairly common amphibian species declared all but extinct after severe declines in the 1950s and 1960s have subsequently recovered, and so might the apparently declining populations that have generated the current appearance of an amphibian crisis. Unfortunately, longterm data will not soon be forthcoming, and postponing environmental action while we wait for it may doom species and whole ecosystems to extinction.
It can be inferred from the passage that the author believes which of the following to be true of the environmentalists mentioned in the highlighted text?
They have wrongly chosen to focus on anecdotal reports rather than on the long-term data that are currently available concerning amphibians.
Their recommendations are flawed because their research focuses too narrowly on a single category of animal species.
Their certainty that population declines in general are caused by environmental degradation is not warranted.
They have drawn premature conclusions concerning a crisis in amphibian populations from recent reports of declines.
They have overestimated the effects of chance events on trends in amphibian populations.
题目分析:
文章推断题:作者相信,高亮中的环境学家?
原文:这个下降(趋势),如果是真的,可能是趋向灭绝的信号,并且许多环境学家认为即刻的、针对“两栖动物危机”的环保行动是必须的,这个危机反应了人类活动导致的环境恶化。
选项分析:
A选项:错误的关注了轶事记录而不是目前关注两栖动物的长期数据:作者没有表达出这个态度。
B选项:他们的建议有问题,因为他们的研究过于狭隘,局限在了某一个单一的物种:文章没有认为他们的研究过于局限。
C选项:他们认为数量下降是由于环境恶化造成的,这个看法是没有担保的:这些环境学家认为数量下降反映了环境恶化,但没有说其中的因果联系。
D选项:正确。从近期的报道里,他们得出了一个关于两栖动物危机的不成熟的建议:后文在讲两栖动物的下降真的需要我们担心吗?但我们无法得到长期数据,所以这个下降趋势背后真正的原因和影响有待考证,但学者就此得出结论,过于仓促——premature
E选项:他们高估了两栖动物数量变化这个趋势的影响:这个趋势的真正影响有待考证,所以我们无法确定是不是高估了。
C. 环境学家们认为decline是作为环境退化的一个indicator,是相关性,不是因果性,并不是说decline是由环境退化而造成的
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论