Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Medium

PT127 S4 P2 Q12 Explanation

Inclusive Fitness Theory

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

TopicsInferenceScience

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

Mechanisms for recognizing kin are found throughout the plant and animal kingdoms, regardless of an organism's social or mental complexity. Improvements in the general understanding of these mechanisms have turned some biologists' attention to the question of why kin recognition occurs at all. One response to this question is offered by the the honeybee, most of whose members do not produce offspring and exist only to nurture relatives.

Inclusive fitness theory has also been applied usefully to new findings concerning cannibalism within animal species. Based on the theory, cannibals should have evolved to avoid eating their own kin because of the obvious genetic costs of such a practice. Spadefoot toad tadpoles provide an illustration. Biologists have found that all tadpoles when it becomes very hungry, apparently putting its own unique genetic makeup ahead of its siblings'.

But there may be other reasons why organisms recognize kin. For example, it has recently been found that tiger salamander larvae, also either omnivorous or cannibalistic, are plagued in nature by a deadly bacterium. Furthermore, it was determined that cannibal larvae are especially likely to be infected by eating diseased species members. which an organism preserves its own life, not as a means to aid in relatives' survival.

What this question is testing

Inference

Your task

Find what must be true based on what the passage or stimulus states.

Common trap

Answers that are plausible or likely but not actually guaranteed by the text.

Winning move

Keep only the choice the statements fully support — eliminate anything that requires an extra assumption.

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

The question
12.

The passage most strongly supports which one of the following statements about the mechanism by which cannibal spadefoot toad

Answer choices

  1. Correct71% picked this

    It is not dependent solely on the use of

    Why this is right

    Sure, since the mechanism is "nipping", which means to take a tiny bite of something, the mechanism is not exclusively visual. Does this answer mean that the mechanism is partially visual? Nope. Not all NFL players are women. (true) Not all humans live on Mars. (true) Humans do not depend solely on peanut butter to breathe. (true) Whenever we see "not all / not necessarily / need not / not solely", it's only telling us that there is something that isn't what we're talking about. Not all NFL players are women. (true) at least one NFL player is not a woman. Not all humans live on Mars. (true) at least one human does not live on Mars. Humans do not depend solely on peanut butter to breathe. (true) humans use at least one thing to breathe that isn't peanut butter. This answer is saying, the mechanism by which spadefoot tadpoles recognize kin as at least one non-visual cue.

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

  2. Unsupported: not possessed by others11% picked this

    It is neither utilized nor possessed by those tadpoles that do

    We have no way to say whether non-cannibalistic tadpoles also do / don't have this capacity to nip at a fellow tadpole and detect whether it's a stranger or relative.

  3. Unsupported: imperfect mechanism8% picked this

    It does not always allow a tadpole to distinguish its siblings from tadpoles that

    Do we have any evidence that this nipping mechanism makes mistakes? Does the passage mention false positives or false negatives? Nope. No support provided for mistakes.

  4. Opposite4% picked this

    It is rendered unnecessary by physiological changes accompanying the dietary shift from

    We are actually told specifically that this mechanism is being used after the tadpole has already made the shift from omnivorous to carnivorous.

  5. Too Strong: could not have developed5% picked this

    It could not have developed in a species in which all

    We don't have any way to say that "the only way a nipping kin-recognition mechanism could develop is if at least some members of a species are not omnivorous". We don't know whether other species (omnivorous or otherwise) do or don't also have this nipping mechanism for kin recognition.

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