Thanks for the question! So remember, this question is asking us for the argumentative strategy that’s being employed in this stimulus. So is it true that a generalization about the conditions under which a certain process can occur is advanced on the basis of an examination of certain cases in which that process did occur? Well, a couple of things with this one. First of all, there’s technically only one case discussed, which is that of plankton. Also, what is the generalization that’s being advanced? There’s not really a generalization here. We’re just told that a characteristic is quite common among a bunch of species, so this is actually a counterpoint to the original claim that only the most highly evolved species alter their environment in ways that aid their own survival. So it’s helping explain a counterpoint, not advance some generalization. And so that’s why (C) doesn’t accurately describe it; (D) does a much better job of telling us what’s going on in this argument.
Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any other questions that you might have.