gwd-24-29

[訪客]

24-29: Plant scientists have been able to genetically engineer vegetable seeds to produce crops that are highly resistant to insect damage. Although these seeds currently cost more than conventional seeds, their cost is likely to decline. Moreover, farmers planting them can use far less pesticide, and most consumers prefer vegetables grown with less pesticide, therefore, for crops for which these seeds can be developed, their use is likely to become the norm.

Which of the following would be most useful to know in evaluating the argument above?
A) Whether plant scientists have developed insect-resistant seeds for every crop that is currently grown commercially?
B) Whether farmers typically use agricultural pesticides in large amounts than is necessary to prevent crop damage?
C) Whether plants grown from the new genetically engineered seeds can be kept completely free of insect damage?
D) Whether seeds genetically engineered to produce insect-resistant crops generate significantly lower per acre crop yields than do currently used seeds?
E) Whether most varieties of crops currently grown commercially have greater natural resistance to insect damage than did similar varieties in the past.



我選C,答案是D

[QQcandy]

The argument is stated that "....vegetable seeds to produce crops that are highly resistant to insect damage" Therefore, we don't have to make sure/evaluate whether they are completely free of insect damage.

Contrary, the argument is stated that the costs of the new seeds are likely to decrease because "demand more, develop more" However, it will bring the issue that whether the production quantity can fit the demand and whether their production quantity is as much as the old seeds. Therefore, D is the answer.

Hope it's clear.

[twkevin]

24-29: Plant scientists have been able to genetically engineer vegetable seeds to produce crops that are highly resistant to insect damage. Although these seeds currently cost more than conventional seeds, their cost is likely to decline. Moreover, farmers planting them can use far less pesticide, and most consumers prefer vegetables grown with less pesticide, therefore, for crops for which these seeds can be developed, their use is likely to become the norm. (此argument 的結論)
Which of the following would be most useful to know in evaluating the argument above?
A) Whether plant scientists have developed insect-resistant seeds for every crop that is currently grown commercially?
B) Whether farmers typically use agricultural pesticides in large amounts than is necessary to prevent crop damage?
C) Whether plants grown from the new genetically engineered seeds can be kept completely free of insect damage?
D) Whether seeds genetically engineered to produce insect-resistant crops generate significantly lower per acre crop yields than do currently used seeds?
E) Whether most varieties of crops currently grown commercially have greater natural resistance to insect damage than did similar varieties in the past.



我選C,答案是D

這題看了好幾次 還是prefer (C)
原文提到highly resistant to insect damage; 而選項(C)盧ompletely我覺的才是要evaluate 的point ; 因為如果不是completely 可能還是要用到pesticide

另外 (D)原文提到現在價格還是較高,以後才會下降 ; 我覺的意思是現在先不用看價格, 而且即使要看應該也是看total cost rather than 單某一成本或產出
即使用genetically engineered seed , per acre crop yield降低了
可是是不是有超過省下少用的 pesticide的費用 是無法判斷的

[agk99]

我覺得還是要選D

選C不好理由在於，要是他可完全免於蟲害，可是價格超高，怎麼辦

反觀D，選項敘述單位產量的先後比較，只要是單位產量高或低於過去，農夫就能判斷是否要選擇新品種，這裡己經隱含了價格高低及能否免於蟲害兩項考慮因素

E則是單純從獲利角度看，類似C只考慮蟲害的問題

[Calvin]

I agree with agk.

[twkevin]

我覺得還是要選D

選C不好理由在於，要是他可完全免於蟲害，可是價格超高，怎麼辦
可是原文說 their cost is likely to decline ; 因此我認為可以先不考慮
反觀D，選項敘述單位產量的先後比較，只要是單位產量高或低於過去，農夫就能判斷是否要選擇新品種，這裡己經隱含了價格高低及能否免於蟲害兩策瓞{因素
雖然提到價格可是並不是總成本或收入,無法確認最後收益是否提升
另外D選項,我怎麼看不出有免於蟲害的意思
E則是單純從獲利角度看，類似C只考慮蟲害的問題

[twkevin]

這題跟天山3-Q3真是兄弟題 長的真像

[agk99]

文章說價格有decline，或是有蟲害要你做評估
其實就是要估新的產出會不會讓價格低於原來的，或是蟲害是否少於原來的
所以你不能說cost decline可以先不考慮
反而是一定要考慮的

一點意見請參考

[evelight]

雖然字典裡yield可當產量和收益兩解
我覺得在本題討論農作物的背景下，當產量比較通順

選項D:
假如農作雖然抗蟲，產出卻低
那麼農民就要買更多的種子以達到相同的產量
以前是花農藥錢
現在是花種子錢
在經濟上不見得是誘因

[evelight]

選項C:
基因改良作物能不能『完全』抗蟲其實不重要
重要的是採用基因改良作物能不能使農民成本降低

就算不能完全抗蟲，但抗蟲效果已經足以省下一大筆農藥費用
(雖然還是得用一點農藥)
那麼看在錢的份上基因改良作物就會普及

[EVAN HUNG]

這題我本來也一直覺得是c
後來看看，題目裡說新的crops是高度抗蟲，所以只需要用到less pesticide，而消費者喜歡這種只有less pesticide的crops
所以，到底能不能"compeletely" free of insect damage 就不是主要的點了，因為如果無法100%防蟲而需要用到less pesticide，消費者還是相當prefer啊!

推(d)~~

[cyrus_tsai]

我覺得C選項
有重複命題之嫌............
D
significantly lower per acre crop yields

重要的是經濟效益吧....若是用新的種子
產量只有原先的一半..而且是以面積為單位的產量.
significantly lower
這樣抗蟲害的經濟效益都抵銷掉了....
不論是原命題..或是C選項都是在抗蟲害的經濟效益上討論
但是
D可以根本否定他們....
所以我覺得是D

[Heart]

題目重點好像是隨著成本下降及農藥用量減少，新品種的種子會成為趨勢，問評價

我會傾向選E耶...
如果大多數農作物抗蟲性已經提高，新品種將不會成為未來趨勢
取非，如果大多數農作物抗蟲性並沒有改變，新品種才會成為未來趨勢

這題感覺很像在郊區開新店的導致市區商店倒閉四分之一的那題
應該要確定比較基準相同才可以衡量方法的可行性

個人想法，歡迎繼續討論...

[yaokk]

題目重點好像是隨著成本下降及農藥用量減少，新品種的種子會成為趨勢，問評價

我會傾向選E耶...
如果大多數農作物抗蟲性已經提高，新品種將不會成為未來趨勢
這不是E提到的喲~~E只說抗蟲性的提高是跟過去的同品種比較，沒有說新品種會不會成為未來的趨勢
取非，如果大多數農作物抗蟲性並沒有改變，新品種才會成為未來趨勢

這題感覺很像在郊區開新店的導致市區商店倒閉四分之一的那題
應該要確定比較基準相同才可以衡量方法的可行性

個人想法，歡迎繼續討論...

贊成D。
題目給的資訊使新種子成為未來趨勢的理由有三：
一、換新種子的成本不會太高(因為雖然它現在比一般的貴，但價錢會下降)
二、農夫可以用少一點殺蟲劑
三、消費者喜歡殺蟲劑少的corps

D提到換了新種子會不會使單位面積產量明顯變少？
如果會，那農夫不會換種新品種
如果不會，那農夫會換種新品種，因為成本沒有明顯增加，又可迎合消費者的喜愛。
那麼D可以evaluate這個argument

E說的是現在的作物(舊種子)有沒有比以前的抗蟲能力更好？
並沒有跟新種子搭上橋樑(--對岸的說法)
無法判斷會不會使新種子成為農夫的新寵兒。

這是我的想法，大家再討論討論囉

[SELVICHY]

這題大家都在CD之間討論,在下十分汗顏.
我這提選A.是否這些農作物都是商業化產品?

因為題目交代了成本考量,消費者偏好,但這些對於
種植燕麥或玉黍蜀等給牛羊等牲畜吃(非商業產品)的農人來講,
根本不是重點.
牛會報怨農藥灑太多嗎?何況種植這些的成本還比原來的高,
對於這些農民來說,何苦呢?
如果是種植有機蔬菜,番茄,葡萄等農作物的農民來說,
消費者考量跟成本就很重要了,
因為他必須賣到市場上,必須迎合消費者,又必須兼顧這項新產品的成本,
所以科學家開發的這些種子,如果是商業化農作物,就有用,如果只是塞給牛羊吃的穀物,就沒有市場價值了.

不知一片喧譁中,可否有其他與我想法雷同者?