Set 1: Inferences (Intermediate)
Explanation
PASSAGE
Researchers found that forests near highways contained trees with significantly darker bark than those in remote areas. The darkening, caused by accumulated vehicle pollution, may be affecting how well bark camouflages insect species, potentially shifting predator-prey dynamics.
What does the research suggest about urban pollution's ecological effects?
Detailed Explanation
This question asks you to draw a logical conclusion from the text. Pollution → darker bark → changed camouflage → shifted predator-prey dynamics = indirect cascade. A valid inference must be supported by evidence in the passage, even if not stated directly. Look for clues in the text that strongly suggest the answer. Avoid conclusions that require assumptions beyond what's written. Valid inferences are strongly supported by multiple pieces of evidence in the text. Be cautious of choices that go too far beyond what the passage actually states. The best inference is the one most directly supported by textual evidence.
Key Evidence:
• "affecting how well bark camouflages insect species"
• "potentially shifting predator-prey dynamics"
Why others are wrong: A (The passage says dynamics may be 'shifting.'), B (Pollution-darkened bark isn't described as healthier.), D (Trees (plants) are also affected.).