Text 1: Urban ecologist Dr. Lisa Chen studies city wildlife. "Urban areas host surprising biodiversity," Chen reports. "Adapted species thrive in parks, rooftops, and green corridors. Cities can become wildlife refuges with proper planning."
Text 2: Conservation biologist Dr. Mark Adams prioritizes wilderness. "Urban habitat cannot replace natural ecosystems," Adams argues. "Species adapted to cities are common generalists. Rare species requiring specialized habitats find no refuge in urban environments."
Which choice best describes the relationship between the two texts?
Text 2 argues that Chen's research methods are scientifically flawed
Text 2 qualifies Chen's optimism by distinguishing between species types
Text 2 supports Chen's conclusions with additional examples
Text 2 proposes that all cities should be converted to wilderness
Correct Answer: B
Choice B is the correct answer. Adams doesn't deny urban biodiversity exists but distinguishes: cities host "common generalists," not "rare species." He qualifies rather than refutes Chen.
- Evidence: Adams accepts some urban wildlife but limits its significance.
- Reasoning: His distinction between species types nuances Chen's broader claim.
- Conclusion: Text 2 qualifies by specifying which species benefit.
Choice A is incorrect because methods aren't questioned. Choice C is incorrect because Adams challenges, not supports. Choice D is incorrect because Adams advocates wilderness preservation, not conversion.