Q19

[LSAT-Chang]

Where do we get evidence for A??? Is "plant growth" = "photosynthetic rates"?? I chose D for this but I guess it's wrong since enhanced plant growth CAN lead to abundances of certain species of plants (i.e. weedy grass).

[americano1990]

If you know the reason why (D) is wrong --and it seems that you do-- that would serve as your support for (A).

So we know that although things like corns and stuff will decrease, weeds will take over their places right?
The specific line reference is 25-27 "PAtterson and FLint have shown that these important crops....because of increased performance of certain weeds." And 'increased performance' here refers to the increase in photosynthetic rates.
How am I able to deduce this? The sentence right above the quoted one tells you that the plants that currently have higher photo efficiences may lose THAT edge in atmosphere rich in CO2.

So this part of the passage is a clear support for answer choice (A) because increased CO2 levels are expected to increase the photo rates of weeds, which definitely belong to the category of plants.

I hope this helps~

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

Nice explanation americano1990!

[Crogati]

Is (D) wrong because the first paragraph does not actually suggest that enhanced plant growth could lead to abundances in certain crops. The first paragraph makes a more widespread statement about "some research suggesting that elevated CO2 could enhance the photosynthetic rates of plants (in a general sense)."

Then, in 2nd paragraph, the author extrapolates this statement about CO2 to make his point saying, more or less, hey actually that's only part of the story, what really happens is that elevated CO2 enhances the photosynthetic rates for some plants more than others leading to an environmental imbalance and increased global warming, etc.

So I though (D) was wrong because this is not a conclusion made in the first paragraph. Even the opposite of this answer choice would be wrong (i.e. conclusions are correct) because this conclusion is never made.

Anyway, sorry for the long-winded question. I am thinking about this too much? I am working on understanding the relationship between sentences and entire texts & words and concepts.

[tangdanni422]

I am wondering how do we define "certain" for LSAT?

Does it just mean SOME, or DETERMINED SOME?

In answer choice D, how do we interpret "certain species of plants?" Can "certain species of plants" mean "agricultural plants?"

Someone please help me. Thanks in advance:)

[christine.defenbaugh]

I am wondering how do we define "certain" for LSAT?

Does it just mean SOME, or DETERMINED SOME?

In answer choice D, how do we interpret "certain species of plants?" Can "certain species of plants" mean "agricultural plants?"

Someone please help me. Thanks in advance:)

I'm not sure that we can rely on a super-strict mathematical definition for the word "certain" every time it appears on the LSAT. It essentially means just "some", and even when it's being used to refer to a specific "some", that would generally be an unnamed "some".

Could "certain" in (D) mean "agricultural plants"? It might, but it does not *have* to. How does this help or hurt us? If the researchers in Paragraph 1 have suggested "that enhanced growth could lead to abundances of certain species of plants" - then the author would say that's totally correct! It may not lead to agricultural abundance, specifically, but it could lead to an abundance of weedy grass plants. Thus, it *could* lead to an abundance of certain plants - the weedy grasses.

Does this help a bit?

[emily315]

Im also confused why D is not correct.
The passage said that certain weeds would have increased performance....weed grows much better with CO2....that it even might increase the chance of wild fire.....
doesn't this mean abundance of certain species of plants?

[ohthatpatrick]

It does. (D) is wrong because of the word "incorrect". If it said "correct", it would be accurate.

The author AGREES that enhanced plant growth could lead to abundances of certain species of plants.

If Bob says, "The study was incorrect in suggesting that fudge is delicious", he is saying, "Fudge is NOT delicious".