QUESTION TEXT: One adaptation that enables an animal species…
QUESTION TYPE: Paradox
PARADOX: One way prey animals avoid being eaten is by using camouflage. But, some prey species that don’t have other adaptations use black and white. This black and white seems like poor camouflage.
ANALYSIS: This is puzzling. The stimulus makes clear that the animals aren’t using other adaptations. And their colouring doesn’t seem like good camouflage. We have to figure out some way they survive: either the black and white is somehow useful, or the local predators aren’t very effective.
___________
- This is tempting, but not convincing. Let’s look at a few reasons why this might seem correct:
1. “What if so much prey that predators can’t eat it all?”.
Predators and prey exist in equilibrium. So if there’s excess prey, you’d expect the predator population to grow. If this doesn’t happen…well that’s the paradox we’re trying to figure out! So potentially this answer deepens the paradox. There are tons of prey, but the predators don’t eat them….why?
2. “What if large numbers let the prey fight back”?
Good thought, except the stimulus said that many such prey have no other countermeasures. And fighting back is a countermeasure. So strength in numbers can’t explain it.
Also, the LSAT allows you to assume things which are common sense. So, what’s the usual relationship of predators to prey? Forget the LSAT and use your common sense.
Think of any nature videos you’ve seen. Which seems more normal:* A herd of gazelle, and a single cheetah trying to hunt one from the pack
* A single gazelle, and a herd of cheetah competing to eat itI’m sure you recognize the former is more likely. Prey usually outnumber predators in nature. Otherwise, predators would run out of food quickly and starve. Take humans and farm animals: there are about 8 billion humans, and over 80 billion farm animals!
So, we could basically assume this answer was true! Therefore it can’t resolve anything.
- This is a true statement, but you’re not looking for a true statement. You’re looking for an explanation.
Yes, desert camouflage is not effective in a jungle (for example). But the fact that camouflage isn’t perfect doesn’t mean black and white camo is good. Some camo may be generally better than others. - CORRECT. This was tricky to choose, but it is the best answer. The author said the black and white color “seems unlikely” to be good camo. That doesn’t mean it can’t be good camo!
If predators see color differently than us, then maybe the black and white is actually good camo against those predators.
This answer may seem like it is contradicting the stimulus, but it isn’t. Instead, it is giving no information that lets us re-evaluate. “Seems unlikely” includes the possibility that the estimate was wrong and the black and white actually is good camo. The author doesn’t sound like an expert, so their guess can be wrong. They weren’t expressing certainty. - Why would a species want to avoid encountering itself? Species generally want to avoid predators most of all. (Yes, some species tend to stay away from each other, but predators are the biggest survival risk). This answer actually suggests the black and white makes the animals seem extra visible.
- So? Most animals are less visible at night. This answer is actually useless. You could equally say “Lack of camouflage uniforms is less of a problem for an army at night than in the day”. But lack of camouflage is still bad!
Free Logical Reasoning lesson
Get a free sample of the Logical Reasoning Mastery Seminar. Learn tips for solving LR questions
Leave a Reply