Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Hard

PT108 S4 P4 Q26 Explanation

Darwin/Taphonomy

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

TopicsLocate DetailSociety

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Passage

Darwin's conception of early prehistoric humans as confident, clever hunter-gatherers has long dominated anthropology. His theory has been reinforced by an accident of history: the human fossil record has been found largely in reverse order. Remains of humans' most recent forebears, who lived 35,000 to 100,000 years ago, were discovered in 1856; in which their environments differ from prehistoric ones (for example, in containing fewer large animal predators).

Recent intellectual developments, such as the new field of taphonomy, have called into question the traditional hypothesis that early hominids outsmarted the predators with whom they competed for meat and that they mastered their world through hunting. Taphonomy investigates the transformation of skeletal remains into fossil—it asks, for example, whether bone piles whether hyenas' teeth scar animal bones differently than do human tools.

Taphonomy has been utilized by some researchers in studying a group of animal fossils, hominid fossils, and stone tools that were almost two million years old. By comparing the microscopic features of linear grooves on the fossilized animal bones with similar grooves on modern bones, the researchers found that cut marks made joints and that the toothmarks of animal carnivores often underlay rather than overlay the cut marks.

The researchers hypothesized from this evidence that early hominids were scavengers of meat left from carnivore kills, rather than hunters of live prey. From patterns of wear on fossilized hominid teeth, the researchers further deduced that early hominids, like other scavengers, ate fruit primarily and meat only occasionally. Early hominids could have hominids who often perched in trees and who foraged and scavenged alone or in small groups.

What this question is testing

Locate Detail

Your task

Pin down exactly what the question asks about the passage — a detail, the author's view, the structure, or the main point — before looking at the choices.

Common trap

Answers that restate a true detail from the passage but don't answer the specific question being asked.

Winning move

Anticipate the answer in your own words from the passage, then find the choice that matches that prediction.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
26.

Each of the following is mentioned in the passage as determinable by taphonomic investigation into the marks on

Answer choices

  1. Mentioned11% picked this

    order in which certain marks were

    This is the last one we found: - was a bone pile deposited by a predator, a hunter, or floodwaters? - do hyenas' teeth scar animal bones differently than do human tools? - what kind of cut marks did stone tools make? - what kind of cut marks were made by carnivores' teeth or sedimentary abrasion? - what are the microscopic features within these linear grooves on the fossil vs. on a modern bone? - did markings of stone tools occur systematically at joints? - which came first, the toothmarks of a carnivore or the cut marks of a stone tool? The final claim of the third paragraph is talking about whether the animal toothmarks overlay the stone tool cut marks (i.e. animal toothmarks came second) or vice versa.

  2. Mentioned6% picked this

    characteristic physical differences among the

    This one gets supported by the discussion at the beginning of the 3rd paragraph, which is explaining how researchers compared "microscopic features of linear grooves on the fossilized animal bones with similar (characteristic) grooves on modern bones". And they found that "cut marks (characteristic of) stone tools differed from the marks (characteristic of) other agents such as carnivores' teeth or sediment. In order to announce that categorial difference that stone tools leave "this type of mark", whereas teeth or sediment leave "that kind of mark", the author is implying that there was some characteristic feature of stone tools vs. carnivores' teeth that allowed researchers to see self-similarity within each group (i.e. "this type of mark") as well as clear cut difference from the other group.

  3. Correct67% picked this

    approximate age of fossils on which the marks

    Why this is right

    None of the tidbits we scrounged up said that taphonomy was used to figure out the age of fossils. Taphonomy was done on some fossils that "were almost two million years old", but the passage didn't suggest that taphonomy was how we knew their age. Their age is probably ascertained through carbon dating. If we do a chemical analysis to figure out how much sodium there is in a 10,000 year old fossil of a hand, that doesn't mean that chemical analysis told us how old that fossil was.

    Skill tested: Locate Detail · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

  4. Mentioned3% picked this

    agents that have left the

    This is saying that taphonomy can be used to figure out what sort of thing left the mark. That's definitely implied since the researchers are figuring out whether a mark came from hyenas' teeth, or a stone tool, or sedimentary abrasion.

  5. Mentioned13% picked this

    similarities to marks on modern

    This is in the 2nd sentence of the 3rd paragraph. By comparing the microscopic features of linear grooves on the fossilized animal bones with similar grooves on modern bones ...

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free