November 2018 LSAT Section 1 Question 13

When so many oysters died off the coast of Britain that some native species were threatened with extinction, the fact...

the66guy on November 17, 2022

Question Choice C

Wouldnt the elimination of the native species dependent make the gap wider between the statements of fact in the stim? Maybe im missing something. If so can i get a little bit of help? Going a little crazy here over this one. Thanks!

Replies

Create a free account to read and take part in forum discussions.

Already have an account? log in

the66guy on November 17, 2022

Sorry let me word this better bc i dont even understand what i just said.

Wouldnt it make the statements more confusing if the elimination of the species that flourishes from the demise of the native species suggest that the native species now have the space to grow?

I dont see how choice C explains the failure of the native oyster populations to recover

Emil-Kunkin on November 17, 2022

Hi, this is indeed a tough one. It seems like C is telling us that the chemical killed both native oysters and the invasive ones, and the invasive ones were about to outcompete the native ones. If we remove the factor that killed both oysters, then we would expect them both to comeback. However, if the invasive ones are able to outcompete the natives, then the removal of the chemical would explain the failure of the natives to thrive: the invasive ones outcompeted them.