Traces of cultivated emmer wheat have been found among

[nayak.purnendu]

Traces of cultivated emmer wheat have been found among the earliest agricultural remains of many archaeological sites in Europe and Asia. The only place where the wild form of emmer wheat has been found growing is a relatively narrow strip of southwest Asia. Since the oldest remains of cultivated emmer wheat yet found are from village sites in the same narrow strip, it is clear that emmer wheat was first domesticated somewhere in that strip.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

(A) The present-day distribution of another wild wheat, einkorn, which was also domesticated early in the development of agriculture, covers a much larger area of southwest Asia.
(B) Modern experiments show that wild emmer wheat can easily be domesticated so as to yield nearly as well as traditionally domestic strains.
(C) At the time when emmer wheat was first cultivated, it was the most nutritious of all the varieties of grain that were then cultivated.
(D) In the region containing the strip where wild emmer wheat has been found, climatic conditions have changed very little since before the development of agriculture.
(E) It is very difficult, without genetic testing, to differentiate the wild form of emmer wheat from a closely related wild wheat that also grows in southwest Asia.


Source: Gmatprep
Q1. Is there a little bit of scope shift when the argument says "cultivated emmer wheat" and "wild form of emmer wheat" ?
Q2. Can some one help me by explaining the argument and its structure.
Q3. How to crack this question ? answer: d

[smilepinks]

Experts: Can you provide an explanation to this CR? I am unable to justify D

[RonPurewal]

Traces of cultivated emmer wheat have been found among the earliest agricultural remains of many archaeological sites in Europe and Asia. The only place where the wild form of emmer wheat has been found growing is a relatively narrow strip of southwest Asia. Since the oldest remains of cultivated emmer wheat yet found are from village sites in the same narrow strip, it is clear that emmer wheat was first domesticated somewhere in that strip.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

(A) The present-day distribution of another wild wheat, einkorn, which was also domesticated early in the development of agriculture, covers a much larger area of southwest Asia.
(B) Modern experiments show that wild emmer wheat can easily be domesticated so as to yield nearly as well as traditionally domestic strains.
(C) At the time when emmer wheat was first cultivated, it was the most nutritious of all the varieties of grain that were then cultivated.
(D) In the region containing the strip where wild emmer wheat has been found, climatic conditions have changed very little since before the development of agriculture.
(E) It is very difficult, without genetic testing, to differentiate the wild form of emmer wheat from a closely related wild wheat that also grows in southwest Asia.


Source: Gmatprep
Q1. Is there a little bit of scope shift when the argument says "cultivated emmer wheat" and "wild form of emmer wheat" ?
Q2. Can some one help me by explaining the argument and its structure.
Q3. How to crack this question ? answer: d

the evidence in the argument is based on where this strain of wheat has been found growing, NOW in modern times (as you can tell from the present perfect, "has been found growing"). if we're going to argue about the domestication of this wheat, in ancient times, then we need to know that the same conditions that prevail now also prevailed back then.
this is why (d) strengthens the argument. without (d), it's irrelevant where this wheat grows today.

[lylylq]

Traces of cultivated emmer wheat have been found among the earliest agricultural remains of many archaeological sites in Europe and Asia. The only place where the wild form of emmer wheat has been found growing is a relatively narrow strip of southwest Asia. Since the oldest remains of cultivated emmer wheat yet found are from village sites in the same narrow strip, it is clear that emmer wheat was first domesticated somewhere in that strip.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

(A) The present-day distribution of another wild wheat, einkorn, which was also domesticated early in the development of agriculture, covers a much larger area of southwest Asia.
(B) Modern experiments show that wild emmer wheat can easily be domesticated so as to yield nearly as well as traditionally domestic strains.
(C) At the time when emmer wheat was first cultivated, it was the most nutritious of all the varieties of grain that were then cultivated.
(D) In the region containing the strip where wild emmer wheat has been found, climatic conditions have changed very little since before the development of agriculture.
(E) It is very difficult, without genetic testing, to differentiate the wild form of emmer wheat from a closely related wild wheat that also grows in southwest Asia.


Source: Gmatprep
Q1. Is there a little bit of scope shift when the argument says "cultivated emmer wheat" and "wild form of emmer wheat" ?
Q2. Can some one help me by explaining the argument and its structure.
Q3. How to crack this question ? answer: d

the evidence in the argument is based on where this strain of wheat has been found growing, NOW in modern times (as you can tell from the present perfect, "has been found growing"). if we're going to argue about the domestication of this wheat, in ancient times, then we need to know that the same conditions that prevail now also prevailed back then.
this is why (d) strengthens the argument. without (d), it's irrelevant where this wheat grows today.

hi,ron.why b is not right?

[mourinhogmat2]

Traces of cultivated emmer wheat have been found among the earliest agricultural remains of many archaeological sites in Europe and Asia. The only place where the wild form of emmer wheat has been found growing is a relatively narrow strip of southwest Asia. Since the oldest remains of cultivated emmer wheat yet found are from village sites in the same narrow strip, it is clear that emmer wheat was first domesticated somewhere in that strip.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

(A) The present-day distribution of another wild wheat, einkorn, which was also domesticated early in the development of agriculture, covers a much larger area of southwest Asia.
(B) Modern experiments show that wild emmer wheat can easily be domesticated so as to yield nearly as well as traditionally domestic strains.
(C) At the time when emmer wheat was first cultivated, it was the most nutritious of all the varieties of grain that were then cultivated.
(D) In the region containing the strip where wild emmer wheat has been found, climatic conditions have changed very little since before the development of agriculture.
(E) It is very difficult, without genetic testing, to differentiate the wild form of emmer wheat from a closely related wild wheat that also grows in southwest Asia.

I will make an attempt to dissect this question...
Premise1: C EM wheat is found in asia and europe.
Premise2: W EM wheat is found in narrow strip.
Premise3: C EM wheat in villages in narrow strip
Conclu: EM Wheat was domesticated in villages in narrow strip.
A: weakens by introducing alternative cause.
B: This statement talks about the yield. But we need something specific to location. (If u notice the premises, Asia, Europe, Narrow strip and villages...you ought to get a clue)
C: Irrelevant, nutrition is not the topic of discussion.
D: CORRECT.
E: Weakens by stating that it is difficult to identify origin.

[RonPurewal]

hi,ron.why b is not right?

choice (b) basically just says that wild emmer wheat can be domesticated. this is something we already know, since the wheat was domesticated by the ancient peoples!
the only knowledge added by choice (b) is the notion that the wild strain of wheat can be cultivated very quickly; this does not help us in any way in resolving the question at hand, which is to figure out the geographic location at which ancient people first domesticated the wheat.

[mehdi.kanoun]

this is a petty hard question. I do not understand yet why B is not correct?

Can some body evaluate the leve of such a question ?

[abedinbhuiyan]

Hey friend,

Read the last sentence and then compare between the two. Which one takes u closer to the answer? I think you will not disagree about D. Moreover B is an attractive ans prepared but GMAC to distract you.

I think that helps.

BR

Abedin

[tim]

Mehdi, i think Ron's answer pretty solidly explains why B is not correct. If you need further help, you're going to have to explain a little more about where his explanation broke down for you..

[namnam123]

Yes, I still do not know how D strengthen the argument.

according to kaplan classic method, a strengthener is new information which is an assumption or increases belief in an assumption. I do not see D increase the belief in any assumption. Pls, help , show me the assumption which D is relevant.

[saptadeepc]

Yes, I still do not know how D strengthen the argument.

according to kaplan classic method, a strengthener is new information which is an assumption or increases belief in an assumption. I do not see D increase the belief in any assumption. Pls, help , show me the assumption which D is relevant.

Keeping aside any method to be used, lets consider the options one by one

Premise1 -> Cultivated wheat found in Europe and Asia
Premise2 -> The "only" place where wild wheat HAS BEEN FOUND is west Asia
Conclusion -> Since premise 1 and premise 2 are are true for the "same" location, wild wheat was domesticated at this location !

--IMP------
Realize that the conclusion is based on the veracity of the location where the two premises coincide ! To support the conclusion, even though we will add some outside information, it should deal with the same location and nothing else !
-----

A. The present-day distribution of another wild wheat, einkorn, which was also domesticated early in the development of agriculture, covers a much larger area of southwest Asia.
Irrelevant - some other larger location will not help us.
-----
B. Modern experiments show that wild emmer wheat can easily be domesticated so as to yield nearly as well as traditionally domestic strains.
Firstly, wild wheat can be domesticated easily .. ok, but we know that. Premise 2 says it has been growing.
Secondly, traditionally domestic strains is something which is outside the scope. The tradition could have started years after first cultivated wheat was found ! we are assuming traditionally means from the time when cultivated wheat was first found. We cant assume anything.
Therefore, we cannot relate conclusion about history and present with this statement !
-----
C. At the time when emmer wheat was first cultivated, it was the most nutritious of all the varieties of grain that were then cultivated. -- Irrelevant to say the least ! nutrition ? who cares ?
-----
D. In the region containing the strip where wild emmer wheat has been found, climatic conditions have changed very little since before the development of agriculture.
This option says climatic conditions have not changed. Because agriculture, cultivation require specific climate condition for each kind of crop, whatever ( wild wheat in this case ) HAS BEEN GROWING COULD HAVE GROWN AT THAT TIME (when cultivated wheat was found ) AT THAT LOCATION as well !
Even if you are not convinced, keep it aside coz neither is it irrelevant nor does it weaken.
-----
E. It is very difficult, without genetic testing, to differentiate the wild form of emmer wheat from a closely related wild wheat that also grows in southwest Asia. -- Irrelevant, outside the scope.
-----

Even through point of elimination 'D' strengthens relatively more than other options.

D does not make the claim outright correct, it pushes in favor of the argument.

[tim]

namnam, i’m afraid you’re not going to get much help from the instructors on this forum explaining Kaplan’s methods. Use other companies’ strategies at your own risk. :) did spata’s explanation help though?

[sabharwal.bhavna]

Sorry for bumping into an old thread.

I have difficulty with the option choice E. It says that the two varieties of wheat are pretty similar unless scientific method is used. Does not it follow that wild wheat was first grown in SW Asia and similar variety was grown in nearby areas? The two varieties are similar and some genetic change must have happened from wild to domestic wheat.

[RonPurewal]

Sorry for bumping into an old thread.

I have difficulty with the option choice E. It says that the two varieties of wheat are pretty similar unless scientific method is used. Does not it follow that wild wheat was first grown in SW Asia and similar variety was grown in nearby areas? The two varieties are similar and some genetic change must have happened from wild to domestic wheat.

(e) is irrelevant, because the other variety of wheat is, well, not emmer wheat.
we only care about the origins of the emmer wheat itself. even if the other wheat is extremely similar to it, it's still a different plant, and so doesn't affect the argument.

as an analogy, consider the following: let's say you are reading an argument about the origin of human beings. if someone comes out with "well, it's really hard to tell old human skulls from old monkey skulls", that's irrelevant -- it doesn't mean that you suddenly have to start tracking the evolution of monkeys in order to understand that of humans.

[davetzulin]

Ron,

I also got to answer choice D by trying to find something that was even relevant to the argument. but the reason I chose it was because I thought if the climate conditions were different then than NOW, then there is a possibility that maybe that wheat grew all over southwest asia, instead of just the strip, and then domestication/cultivation could have been done anywhere. Is that the same logic you were using?

then i read this and it threw me off a bit (one of the premises)

Since the oldest remains of cultivated emmer wheat yet found are from village sites in the same narrow strip,

but the beginning of said this wheat was found in many sites over europe and southern asia. and plus, that premise only mentioned the "oldest", not all.

was the italicized part a really meaningless premise just to throw us off from answer choice D?