Logical Reasoning

PT141 · S2 · Q22 Because the native salmon

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • 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

Because the native salmon in Lake Clearwater had nearly disappeared, sockeye salmon were introduced in 1940.

Hypothesis

The two populations of sockeye salmon differ genetically because they have each adapted genetically to their distinct habitat.

Evidence

In 1940 a genetically uniform group of sockeyes was introduced into the lake. Now there's a group in the deep part of the lake and a group in shallow part, who don't interbreed and now differ genetically.

Evaluate

As soon as we see the word hypothesis (a causal explanation for a phenomenon) in the question stem, we know we can use a Curious Fact / Explanation template.

Curious Fact: Why are the deep water sockeye now genetically different from the shallow sockeye? Author's Story: They have each adapted genetically to their distinct habitat

We then evaluate this via two lenses: 1. is there some OTHER WAY to explain the curious fact? 2. how plausible is the AUTHOR'S WAY of explaining it?

Usually Strengthen questions deal with plausibility of the author's way. Is it plausible that each sockeye population has adapted genetically to its distinct habitat?

Can evolution actually work that quickly? Normally the genetic drift of a species takes thousands or millions of years, not the 80 years since 1940. The only time that evolution works super quickly is with a very isolated population and a very distinct selection pressure (like, all of a sudden, there's sulfur in the water and only the fish that mutate a gene that tolerates sulfur will survive and pass on their genes, so within a few generations, the sulfur-tolerant fish dominate and effectively the "genes" of that species have been changed).

To strengthens the AUTHOR'S STORY, we would want to know that the deep lake and the shallow lake have very different and very important selection pressures, in order for us to think that over the course of 80 years we would have had a mutation so strongly selected for that the populations of sockeye are now genetically different.

Is there some OTHER WAY to explain how these once genetically identical populations of sockeye are now different? Hmmm, how can you change genetic makeup, other than by mutation / natural selection? The only other way that genes get affected is through mating. When two animals have sex, their offspring is a genetic blend of each of the component animals. So maybe the deep lake sockeye and shallow lake sockeye now differ from each other because at least one of them is mating with some other animals, thereby changing the gene pool.

Goal

We either need something that strengthens the idea that the two different parts of the lake have such different survival needs that it's plausible that evolutionary selection pressure could have changed the genetic makeup of the two populations over just 80 years, or we need something that rules out an alternate explanation for why the two populations now have different genetic makeup.

22.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the researchers' hypothesis?

  1. Correct

    Neither of the two populations

    Why this is right

    This rules out some OTHER WAY that their genetics would have changed. If the deep lake sockeye mated with the native salmon, then the result would be fish that have 1/2 sockeye genes, 1/2 native genes. If this were happening in the deep lake, but not the shallow lake, then 80 years later we'd see the deep lake sockeye have a different genetic makeup, since there would now be a lot of native salmon genes mixed into their [ahem] gene pool. This answer doesn't totally rule out interbreeding as the explanation for the genetic change (maybe some of the sockeye interbred with an animal other than the native salmon), but it's incredibly unlikely if not impossible that it happened with a different animal. Usually two species are defined as distinct because they can't interbreed. So salmon should only be able to interbreed with other salmon, one would think. If interbreeding didn't change the genetic makeup, then we're more likely to accept the author's explanation that adaptation changed the genetic makeup.

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

    48% picked this

  2. When the native salmon in

    No Impact

    Citing a parallel between sockeye and native in terms of the fact that the deep lake crew doesn't associate with the shallow lake crew isn't doing anything for us in terms of ruling out an Alternate Explanation or boosting the plausibility of the Author's Explanation.

    30% picked this

  3. Most types of salmon that

    No Impact

    We don't really care what most types of salmon do. The fact that most salmon would hang out in both parts of the lake, whereas sockeye are segregating themselves into two camps, doesn't rule out an Alternate Explanation for the genetic change nor does it help the Author's Explanation.

    8% picked this

  4. One of the populations of

    Opposite (if anything)

    This answer potentially weakens, since the author's conclusion is that "each population has adapted genetically to its distinct habitat". This answer makes it seem like one of the two populations has not adapted genetically to its habitat. It sounds like their DNA is basically the same as when they were dumped there in 1940.

    11% picked this

  5. The total number of sockeye

    No Impact

    The total number of fish in the lake doesn't help us assess the causal mystery behind why the two populations of sockeye now have different genetic makeups.

    2% picked this

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