Information and IdeasMediumEvidence that a weed, not fishing, is reducing fish
Information and Ideas practice question
A biologist argues that a lake's fish are declining because of an invasive weed rather than because of fishing.
Which finding, if true, would most directly support the claim?
- A. Fish numbers have fallen only in the bays where the weed has spread and have held steady in the open water where fishing is heaviest.Correct
- B. The lake is popular with anglers.
- C. The weed was first seen in 2015.
- D. Fish numbers in the lake have fallen by half.
Answer: A. Fish numbers have fallen only in the bays where the weed has spread and have held steady in the open water where fishing is heaviest.
Decline follows the weed, not the fishing.
Why the other answers are wrong
- B. The lake is popular with anglers.
- Popularity does not separate the causes.
- C. The weed was first seen in 2015.
- A date does not separate the causes.
- D. Fish numbers in the lake have fallen by half.
- The decline itself, with no cause.
More Information and Ideas questions
- Medium
Which choice best states the main idea of the text? - Medium
Which choice best states the main idea of the text? - Medium
Which choice most logically completes the text? - Medium
Which choice best states the main idea of the text? - Medium
Which choice best describes data from the table that call the student's claim into question? - Medium
Based on the text, why did Wood and colleagues rely on coprolites rather than on bone collagen to study the mo…
Not affiliated with the College Board. SAT is a trademark of the College Board.