Burning Forests

Answer choices

1. A

   Opposite13% picked this

   extensive homogeneous forests at high

   When the author talks about pine-dominant forests at high elevations, she isn't supporting her main point about controlled burning. She's actually making a disclaimer / a concession, that goes against that main point: While there are extensive pine forests in Guatemala and Mexico, these grow in cool / dry / high areas where such vegetation is in large part natural and even prehuman. The evidence for controlled burning are the homogenous pine forests that occur in areas "where warm temperatures and heavy rainfall would naturally favor mixed forests".

   13%
2. B

   Correct61% picked this

   extensive homogeneous forests at low

   Why this is right

   This is what the final five sentences of the passage are all about, so for a Locate Detail question, this answer involves a lot of synthesis of multiple claims. [Controlled] Burning also influenced forest composition in the tropics. An example is the pine-dominant (i.e. homogenous) forests of Nicaragua, which are warm and wet, so they would naturally be mixed forests (i.e. heterogenous) The question stem asked us what the author presented as evidence of controlled burning in the tropics. These two lines are saying that "these pine-dominant forests of Nicaragua are evidence of controlled burning in the tropics." We now just have to understand that these "pine-dominant forests" are correctly described as homogenous and low elevation. "Homogenous" means "of the same type". Meanwhile, "heterogeneous" is a synonym for "mixed". Thus, if nature favors mixed forests in these warm/wet areas of the tropics, but we're seeing something different, then we're seeing something non-mixed, i.e. "homogenous". We learn that these forests are low elevation because they are contrasted with cool / dry / high forests where it's natural for pine trees to dominate. Also, the final sentence of the passage talks about other forests that are "similarly low elevation". Finally, how do we work in the part of the answer about "before the Europeans arrived"? In the last two sentences it's saying that when Europeans arrived, there was already a correlation between where human settlements were found and where these homogenous forests were unnaturally found. So there had already been controlled burning before they arrived.

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

   61%
3. C

   Out of Scope: high heterogeneous3% picked this

   extensive heterogeneous forests at high

   There is no mention of extensive heterogeneous high elevation forests in this last paragraph. The high elevation tropical forest mentioned is an "extensive pine forest", which means it's 'homogeneous", not 'heterogeneous'. Also, the reference to high elevation forests is part of the author's disclaimer, not part of the evidence for controlled burning.

   3%
4. D

   Out of Scope: low heterogeneous7% picked this

   extensive heterogeneous forests at low

   Extensive heterogeneous low elevation forests (i.e. mixed hardwoods) are found - in areas where humans didn't settle - in areas where settled humans abandoned that land and moved away They are evidence that humans don't or didn't live somewhere. But they're not evidence that controlled burning IS occurring. They are the natural state for warm / wet tropical forests.

   7%
5. E

   Out of Support Window15% picked this

   extensive sedimentary charcoal accumulations at high

   "Charcoal" is discussed as evidence for controlled burning, in the 2nd paragraph. But that discussion has nothing to do with the Tropical latitudes, nor does it relate to the arrival of Europeans.

   15%