Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardIdentifying Premises and Evidence

Several agricultural cooperatives in the Pacific Northwest recently introduced microalgae-based soil conditioners to reduce reliance on synthetic fertilizers. Although skepticism persists regarding the initial processing costs of microalgae, extensive field trials conducted over three consecutive harvest cycles demonstrated a 22 percent increase in soil nitrogen retention without altering pH levels. Therefore, municipal agricultural boards should subsidize microalgae conditioning for smallholder farms to ensure long-term soil health.

Which of the following statements functions as the primary evidence supporting the author's main recommendation?

  1. A
    Several agricultural cooperatives in the Pacific Northwest introduced microalgae-based soil conditioners.
  2. B
    Initial processing costs for microalgae-based conditioners remain a source of ongoing skepticism.
  3. Field trials over three consecutive harvests demonstrated a 22 percent increase in soil nitrogen retention without altering pH levels.Answer
  4. D
    Municipal agricultural boards should subsidize microalgae conditioning for smallholder farms.
  5. E
    Subsidizing microalgae conditioning will permanently guarantee the financial viability of smallholder farms.

Answer

The statement detailing the field trials that demonstrated a 22 percent increase in soil nitrogen retention without altering pH levels functions as the primary premise supporting the recommendation.
The claim regarding the field trials provides the specific empirical data (a 22 percent increase in nitrogen retention) used to justify why municipal boards should provide subsidies for microalgae conditioning. Thus, it serves directly as the argument's primary supporting premise.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the structural components of the argument.
Identify the background context (cooperatives introducing conditioners), the counterargument/qualification (persisting skepticism over initial costs), the main premise (field trial results showing a 22 percent nitrogen retention increase), and the conclusion (boards should subsidize conditioning).
Deconstructing the argument allows for clear distinction between context, evidence, and conclusions.
2
Evaluate the functional role of the trial results statement.
Recognize that the 22 percent nitrogen retention data provides empirical backing for the claim that microalgae conditioning improves soil health effectively.
A premise is a factual claim or piece of evidence used directly to support a recommendation.
3
Select the option that accurately captures this premise.
Identify the option stating that field trials demonstrated a 22 percent increase in soil nitrogen retention without altering pH levels as the correct answer.
This option explicitly states the core evidence justifying the main conclusion.

Key Concept

Identifying Premises and Evidence
Rate this question

Topics

Identifying Premises and Evidence

More questions from this topic