Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumCross-Text Connections: Perspective Comparison

Text 1
Proponents of "assisted migration"—deliberately moving plant species to higher latitudes or elevations to escape warming climates—argue that active human intervention is necessary to prevent mass extinctions. Ecological researcher Dr. Aris Thorne contends that natural migration rates of slow-growing tree species are far outpaced by current climate shifts. Without targeted relocation programs, key forest species face severe habitat fragmentation and ultimate decline. Thorne suggests that the risks of inaction far outweigh the potential ecological disruptions of introducing species to new ranges.

Text 2
Ecologist Dr. Elena Vance urges caution regarding assisted migration, emphasizing the unpredictability of novel ecosystems. Vance points out that introducing non-local tree species can lead to unforeseen competition with native flora and alter soil chemistry, potentially harming established communities. Furthermore, she argues that focusing resources on relocations diverts critical funding from preserving existing habitats. Rather than manually redistributing species, Vance suggests, conservationists should prioritize reinforcing native habitats and connecting corridors to facilitate self-directed migration.

Based on the texts, how would Vance (Text 2) most likely characterize Thorne’s claim in Text 1 that the risks of inaction outweigh the potential disruptions of introducing species to new ranges?

  1. A
    As a valid concern that aligns with her own recommendation to redirect funding toward manually moving endangered plants.
  2. B
    As an unsupported assumption that overestimates the speed at which climate change is altering forest habitats.
  3. As a view that understates the ecological risks of species relocation and ignores more sustainable conservation alternatives.Answer
  4. D
    As a strategy that should be applied exclusively to fast-growing plant species rather than trees.

Answer

The correct answer is the option stating that Vance would view Thorne's claim as underestimating the ecological risks of species relocation and ignoring more sustainable conservation alternatives.
Vance (Text 2) argues that introducing non-local tree species can lead to unforeseen ecological issues, such as competition with native flora and altered soil chemistry, which shows she believes Thorne's claim understates these risks. Furthermore, Vance proposes that conservationists should prioritize reinforcing native habitats and connecting corridors rather than manually redistributing species, which represents a sustainable alternative that Thorne's focus on active relocation ignores.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze Text 1 to identify Thorne's core claim.
Thorne argues that because climate change outpaces natural tree migration, manual species relocation is necessary, and the risks of doing nothing are greater than the risks of introducing species to new environments.
This establishes the premise of the first text.
2
Analyze Text 2 to identify Vance's counterpoints and alternatives.
Vance warns that introducing non-local species can cause unforeseen ecological disruptions (like soil chemistry changes and competition) and argues that resources should instead fund habitat preservation and ecological corridors to support self-directed migration.
This establishes the second text's perspective.
3
Synthesize the relationship between the two perspectives.
Because Vance emphasizes the ecological risks of relocation and proposes corridor preservation as an alternative to manual redistribution, she would view Thorne's claim as underestimating those risks and overlooking better, more sustainable methods.
This leads directly to the correct comparison.

Key Concept

Identifying the relationship between two texts on the same topic by determining how the author of one text would respond to a claim made in the other text.
Rate this question

Topics

Cross-Text Connections: Perspective Comparison

More questions from this topic