Question

Difficulty: Very hardEvaluating Relevance for Adding or Deleting Content

[1] In 1995, the reintroduction of gray wolves to Yellowstone National Park initiated a dramatic ecological transformation known as a trophic cascade. [2] Decades of wolf absence had allowed the elk population to explode, leading to severe overgrazing of willow and aspen trees along riverbanks. [3] Once the wolves returned, their predation and presence forced the elk to avoid open valleys, where they were vulnerable. [4] Consequently, the streamside vegetation began to recover rapidly, stabilizing the soil and reducing erosion. [5] This regrowth of trees attracted songbirds and beavers, who used the wood to build dams, creating habitats for fish, amphibians, and waterfowl. [6] The wolves' return ultimately reshaped not just the animal populations, but the physical geography of the park itself.

At this point, the writer is considering adding the following sentence:
'Beavers are known for their ability to significantly alter river ecosystems by building complex lodges and dams.'

Should the writer make this addition after Sentence 4?

  1. A
    Yes, because it establishes a transition between the recovery of streamside vegetation in Sentence 4 and the return of other animal species in Sentence 5.
  2. B
    Yes, because it provides essential background information explaining how beaver dams physically reshape waterways.
  3. No, because it interrupts the paragraph's detailed tracing of the trophic cascade with a general statement that is redundant with the information in Sentence 5.Answer
  4. D
    No, because it introduces a discussion of river ecosystems that is irrelevant to a paragraph focused exclusively on wolf behavior.

Answer

No, because it interrupts the paragraph's detailed tracing of the trophic cascade with a general statement that is redundant with the information in Sentence 5.
The correct option correctly identifies that the proposed sentence should not be added because it disrupts the precise chronological and logical flow of the paragraph. The paragraph details a step-by-step chain of events: wolf reintroduction leads to fewer elk in valleys, which allows vegetation to recover, which in turn attracts beavers that build dams. Inserting a general statement about beaver dam-building behavior after Sentence 4 interrupts this sequence and is redundant, as Sentence 5 already states that the beavers used the wood to build dams.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the main focus of the paragraph.
The paragraph explains the cause-and-effect sequence of a trophic cascade in Yellowstone: wolves limit elk grazing, which allows vegetation to recover, which then attracts other animals (like beavers) that modify the ecosystem.
To determine if the proposed sentence is relevant and maintains the paragraph's focus.
2
Evaluate the content of the proposed sentence and its placement after Sentence 4.
The proposed sentence states a general fact about beavers' ability to alter river ecosystems by building dams. Placement after Sentence 4 occurs right after discussing vegetation recovery, but before Sentence 5 introduces beavers being attracted by that vegetation.
To see if the sentence fits logically and chronologically in this specific position.
3
Compare the proposed sentence with the existing text for redundancy and flow.
Sentence 5 already states that beavers 'used the wood to build dams, creating habitats.' The proposed sentence's mention of dam-building is therefore redundant and interrupts the step-by-step narrative flow.
To choose the correct decision (No) and the accurate rhetorical reason.

Key Concept

Evaluating relevance for adding content based on paragraph focus and redundancy.
Rate this question