Reading and Writing Test - 3 - SAT MCQ

• Choice D is the best answer because it states why Wang and his team’s discovery of the Terropterus xiushanensis fossil was significant. The text explains that up until Wang and his team’s discovery, the only fossil evidence of mixopterids came from the paleocontinent of Laurussia. Wang and his team, however, identified fossil remains of a mixopterid species from the paleocontinent Gondwana. Therefore, the team’s discovery was significant because the fossil remains of a mixopterid species were outside of the paleocontinent Laurussia.
• Choice A is incorrect. Although the text states that Wang and his team identified fossilized remains of a mixopterid species that lived more than 400 million years ago, it doesn’t indicate that mixopterid fossils previously found by scientists dated to a more recent period than that.
• Choice B is incorrect. Although the text states that mixopterids are related to modern arachnids and horseshoe crabs, it doesn’t suggest that the fossil discovered by Wang and his team confirmed that this relationship is closer than scientists had previously thought.
• Choice C is incorrect because the team’s fossil established the presence of mixopterids on Gondwana, not on Laurussia. Moreover, the text only discusses the fossil in relation to the geographical distribution of mixopterids, not in relation to their evolution.

• Choice C is the best answer because it describes data from the table that support the researcher’s hypothesis. According to the text, the researcher hypothesized that Arctic ground squirrels would exhibit longer torpor bouts and shorter arousal episodes than Alaska marmots do—or, put the other way, that the marmots would show shorter torpor bouts and longer arousal episodes than the ground squirrels do. The table shows data about torpor bouts and arousal episodes for the two species from 2008 to 2011. According to the table, the average duration of torpor bouts was 13.81 days for Alaska marmots, shorter than the average of 16.77 days for Arctic ground squirrels, and the average duration of arousal episodes was 21.2 hours for Alaska marmots, longer than the average of 14.2 hours for Arctic ground squirrels. Thus, the table supports the researcher’s hypothesis by showing that Alaska marmots had shorter bouts of torpor and longer arousal episodes than Arctic ground squirrels did.
• Choice A is incorrect because it inaccurately describes data from the table and doesn’t support the researcher’s hypothesis. The table shows that the average duration of arousal episodes was less than a day for both Alaska marmots (21.2 hours) and Arctic ground squirrels (14.2 hours). Additionally, information about arousal episodes for Alaska marmots and Arctic ground squirrels isn’t sufficient to support a hypothesis involving comparisons of both arousal episodes and torpor bouts for those animals.
• Choice B is incorrect because it doesn’t support the researcher’s hypothesis, which involves comparisons of arousal episodes as well as torpor bouts for Alaska marmots and Arctic ground squirrels. Noting that both animals had torpor bouts lasting several days, on average, doesn’t address arousal episodes at all, nor does it reveal how the animals’ torpor bouts compared.
• Choice D is incorrect because it doesn’t support the researcher’s hypothesis. Although the table does show that Alaska marmots had more torpor bouts (12) than arousal episodes (11) and that their arousal episodes were much shorter than their torpor bouts (21.2 hours and 13.81 days, respectively), comparing data across only Alaska marmot behaviors isn’t sufficient to support a hypothesis about torpor and arousal behaviors of both Alaska marmots and Arctic ground squirrels.

• Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The singular verb “outlines” agrees in number with the singular subject “document.”
• Choice A is incorrect because the plural verb “have outlined” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “document.”
• Choice B is incorrect because the plural verb “were outlining” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “document.”
• Choice D is incorrect because the plural verb “outline” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “document.”

• Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-modifier placement. This choice makes the noun phrase “researcher Robert Losey” the subject of the sentence and places it immediately after the modifying phrase “since…Siberia.” In doing so, this choice clearly establishes that researcher Robert Losey— and not another noun in the sentence—is who uncovered fragments of a 2,000-year-old reindeer training harness in northern Siberia.
• Choice B is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase “researcher Robert Losey’s argument” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that the “argument” is what uncovered fragments of a 2,000-year-old reindeer training harness in northern Siberia.
• Choice C is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun “domestication” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that “domestication” is what uncovered fragments of a 2,000-year-old reindeer training harness in northern Siberia.
• Choice D is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase “the argument” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that the “argument” is what uncovered fragments of a 2,000-year-old reindeer training harness in northern Siberia.

• Choice D is the best answer. “Thus” logically signals that the claim in this sentence—that animals performing only basic actions should allocate relatively few resources to their brain tissue—is a consequence of the previous sentence’s claim about the energy demands of animal brains (namely, that the more diverse an animal’s behaviors, the more energy its brain needs).
• Choice A is incorrect because “subsequently” illogically signals that the claim in this sentence occurs later in a chronological sequence of events than the previous sentence’s claim about the energy demands of animal brains. Instead, the second claim is a consequence of the first.
• Choice B is incorrect because “besides” illogically signals that the claim in this sentence provides a separate point in addition to, or apart from, the previous sentence’s claim about the energy demands of animal brains. Instead, the second claim is a consequence of the first.
• Choice C is incorrect because “nevertheless” illogically signals that the claim in this sentence is true in spite of the previous sentence’s claim about the energy demands of animal brains. Instead, the second claim is a consequence of the first.

• Choice A is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of the Moon’s surface. In this context, “reflect” means show or make apparent. The text states that because the surface of the Moon was softer when the Moon was still forming than it is now, early asteroid and meteoroid impacts “would have left less of an impression” and, as a result, evidence of them may no longer exist. This context supports the idea that the surface of the Moon may not accurately show signs of early impact events.
• Choice B is incorrect because it wouldn’t make sense to say that the surface of the Moon may not accurately “receive,” or acquire or experience, early impacts from asteroids or meteoroids. The text indicates that the impacts have already occurred, and it isn’t clear how the Moon’s surface could be accurate or inaccurate in experiencing them.
• Choice C is incorrect because it wouldn’t make sense to say that the surface of the Moon may not accurately “evaluate,” or determine the significance or condition of, early impacts from asteroids or meteoroids, since that would suggest that it’s possible for the Moon’s surface to make a decision of any kind.
• Choice D is incorrect. In this context, “mimic” would mean to deliberately simulate or closely imitate something. It wouldn’t make sense to say that the surface of the Moon may not accurately mimic early asteroid and meteoroid impacts, since that would suggest that it’s possible for the Moon to deliberately imitate something.

• Choice D is the best answer because it most accurately states the main idea of the text. After establishing that Buck views most people “as nothing,” the text explains that Buck won’t acknowledge people other than Thornton unless they appear friendly toward Thornton, and even then he’s only reluctantly accepting. Thus, the text focuses on the idea that Thornton has a special status in Buck’s mind, with Buck holding him in higher regard than other people.
• Choice A is incorrect because the text conveys that Buck isn’t social with people other than Thornton but doesn’t address Buck’s life or temperament before he lived with Thornton.
• Choice B is incorrect because the text conveys that Buck doesn’t really care about people other than Thornton and is aloof toward them. However, there’s no indication that Buck mistrusts and avoids people generally; indeed, he accepts Thornton, who is a human.
• Choice C is incorrect because the text refers to random travelers praising and petting Buck and Thornton’s partners giving Buck favors, but there’s no indication that any of these people are Thornton’s friends or that they have a particular fondness for Buck.

• Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is the punctuation of a supplementary word or phrase between two main clauses. This choice correctly uses a comma to separate the supplementary adverb “however” from the preceding main clause (“Okinaka doesn’t…single-handedly”) and a semicolon to join the next main clause (“all…culture”) to the rest of the sentence. Further, placing the semicolon after “however” correctly indicates that the information in the preceding main clause (Okinaka doesn’t make such decisions singlehandedly) is contrary to what might be assumed from the information in the previous sentence (Okinaka sits on the review board that adds new sites to the Hawaii Register of Historic Places).
• Choice B is incorrect because placing the semicolon after “single-handedly” and the comma after “however” illogically indicates that the information in the next main clause (all historical designations must be approved by a group of experts) is contrary to the information in the previous clause (Okinaka doesn’t make such decisions single-handedly).
• Choice C is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. Commas can’t be used in this way to punctuate a supplementary word or phrase between two main clauses.
• Choice D is incorrect because it results in a run-on sentence. The two main clauses are fused without punctuation and/or a conjunction.

• Choice D is the best answer. The sentence emphasizes a difference between baking soda and baking powder, noting that baking soda needs to be mixed with an acidic ingredient to produce carbon dioxide but baking powder doesn’t.
• Choice A is incorrect. The sentence focuses on what bakers use to make batters rise; it doesn’t emphasize a difference between baking soda and baking powder.
• Choice B is incorrect. The sentence provides a general description of baking soda and baking powder; it doesn’t emphasize a difference between them.
• Choice C is incorrect. The sentence explains what baking soda and honey are; it doesn’t emphasize a difference between baking soda and baking powder.

• Choice B is the best answer because it most accurately describes how the underlined portion functions in the text as a whole. The first sentence explains that reproducing the high ridership of Mexico City’s public transit system in other cities by implementing some of its features, such as its low fares, is unlikely to guarantee significant ridership increases in those cities. The following sentence introduces a study by Guerra et al., whose findings—namely that choice of transportation mode in urban centers in Mexico is influenced by a variety of local contextual factors—support this claim. The first part of the last sentence concedes that features of transportation systems likely do have some effect on ridership numbers, but the underlined portion reiterates the study’s conclusion by stating that there is an “irreducibly contextual dimension” to peoples’ choice to use public transportation: that is, there is a complex mix of local contextual factors—including population density, spatial distribution of jobs, and demographics—whose influence over an urban center’s transit ridership is unique to each location, and it is unlikely that simple changes to transit system characteristics could negate the influence of those contextual factors. Thus, the underlined portion explains why it is challenging to influence transit ridership solely by changing some of a transit system’s characteristics.
• Choice A is incorrect. Rather than objecting to the argument of Guerra et al., the underlined portion reiterates their argument by stating that there is an “irreducibly contextual dimension” involved in transportation mode choice; in other words, transportation mode choice in urban areas of Mexico is strongly dependent on contextual factors that are unique to each urban area.
• Choice C is incorrect because it mischaracterizes the text’s central claim, which is that transit ridership is the product of a complex mix of contextual factors and transit system features, not that a characteristic associated with Mexico City’s high transit ridership was found to have no association with high transit ridership elsewhere. Additionally, the underlined portion does not illustrate a claim, but instead restates the findings of Guerra et al.
• Choice D is incorrect. Although Guerra et al. demonstrate that population density, the spatial distribution of jobs, and demographic characteristics—factors that comprise the “contextual dimension of transportation mode choice”—influence transit ridership, the underlined portion does not substantiate—that is, provide evidence in support of—this assertion. Rather, the underlined portion merely restates a study finding that explains why simply altering a transit system’s features would be unlikely to induce significant increases in transit ridership.

• Choice B is the best answer because it uses data from the table to complete the statement regarding a species for which the problem of finding a suitable habitat would be especially concerning. For each candidate species, the table lists its common name, scientific name, and when the species became extinct. The text explains that scientists pursing de-extinction for the candidate species also consider the length of time that has passed since the species’ extinction, noting that the longer the animal has been extinct, the less likely it is that a suitable habitat would exist for the species today. The possibility of not having a suitable habitat would be especially concerning for the candidate species for which the most time has passed since its extinction. According to the table this species would be the saber-toothed cat, which became extinct 11,000 years before present.
• Choice A is incorrect because it compares the time since the extinction of the passenger pigeon to the time since the extinction of the huia instead of citing the species listed in the table that has been extinct the longest (the saber-toothed cat). The text indicates that the longer a species has been extinct, the lower the chances are that a suitable habitat exists for it today. Neither the table nor the text supports the claim that the passenger pigeon is especially vulnerable to this problem.
• Choice C is incorrect because the text states that the longer a species has been extinct, the less likely it is that there would be a suitable habitat available for the species today. So, the problem would be especially concerning for the saber-toothed cat, which became extinct several thousand years before the woolly mammoth did—not the other way around.
• Choice D is incorrect because the text states that the longer a species has been extinct, the lower the chances are that a suitable habitat would be available for that species today. According to the table, the Caribbean monk seal became extinct in 1952, which is the most recent extinction listed for a candidate species in the table. 

• Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The plural verb “represent” agrees in number with the plural subject “references.”
• Choice A is incorrect because the singular verb “represents” doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject “references.”
• Choice B is incorrect because the singular verb “has represented” doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject “references.”
• Choice C is incorrect because the singular verb “was representing” doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject “references.” 

• Choice A is the best answer because it most accurately states the main idea of the text. The text begins by explaining that many literary theorists rely on the concepts of fabula (a narrative’s content) and syuzhet (a narrative’s arrangement and presentation of events) and illustrates these concepts by explaining how they can be applied to the film The Godfather Part II. The text then discusses how Mikhail Bakhtin, a literary theorist, argued that fabula and syuzhet can’t fully describe a narrative, since systematic categorizations such as these fail to account for all the ways in which interactions between the artist, the work, and the audience produce meaning. Thus, the main idea is that Bakhtin argued that there are important characteristics of narratives that are not fully encompassed by two concepts that other theorists have used to analyze narratives.
• Choice B is incorrect because according to the text, Mikhail Bakhtin believed that meaning was created through the interactions of the artist, narrative, and audience, not simply through the interaction between the audience and narrative; moreover, the text doesn’t address whether Bakhtin focused on the ways in which different people interpret narratives differently.
• Choice C is incorrect. Although the text implies that the storytelling methods used in The Godfather Part II are complicated, it discusses the film only to illustrate how the concepts of fabula and syuzhet may be applied to a narrative. The film’s storytelling methods aren’t the primary focus of the text.
• Choice D is incorrect. The text discusses The Godfather Part II, whose narrative doesn’t adhere to a single chronological order, only to illustrate the concepts of fabula (a narrative’s content) and syuzhet (narrative’s arrangement and presentation of events). The primary focus of this text isn’t the structure of this film or of other narratives that are told out of chronological order; moreover, the text doesn’t consider whether such structures make it harder for audiences to understand narratives.

• Choice B is the best answer because it describes data from the table that support Persad and her colleagues’ conclusion. The text explains that, according to some climate models, precipitation in the western United States will become concentrated into fewer, more intense rain and snow events. According to the text, Persad and her colleagues concluded that more irrigation will consequently be needed but that the change in irrigation output will be highly sensitive to, or greatly affected by, the baseline concentration of precipitation in an area. This conclusion is supported by data from the researchers’ simulations of changes in annual irrigation output in two different scenarios—one in which an area’s annual precipitation is already somewhat concentrated and one in which its annual precipitation is evenly distributed. The table shows that if baseline precipitation is somewhat concentrated, water use for irrigation will increase only slightly, whereas if baseline precipitation is evenly distributed, water use for irrigation will increase much more—9.0% for surface water and 7.9% for groundwater. This difference illustrates the researchers’ conclusion that the amount of additional water needed for irrigation will vary greatly depending on how concentrated or spread out the annual precipitation in an area already is.
• Choice A is incorrect because it compares changes in the amount of water being used for irrigation to changes in the amount of water entering aquifers. Persad and her colleagues’ conclusion doesn’t focus on changes to the amount of water entering aquifers; rather, the researchers’ conclusion focuses on changes to irrigation output relative to how concentrated or spread out the annual precipitation in an area is.
• Choice C is incorrect because it supports only part of Persad and her colleagues’ conclusion. According to the text, the researchers concluded that the concentration of precipitation into fewer events will trigger more irrigation but that this change in irrigation output will be highly sensitive to an area’s baseline concentration of annual precipitation. The data in this choice support the idea that more irrigation will be needed, but to support the rest of the researchers’ conclusion, additional data from the table are required to show that the increases in water use for irrigation will vary depending on how concentrated or spread out the annual precipitation in an area already is.
• Choice D is incorrect because data in the table indicate no declines in water use for irrigation, showing only increases in the form of positive values.

• Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The plural verb “underlie” agrees in number with the plural subject “frameworks.”
• Choice A is incorrect because the singular verb “underlies” doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject “frameworks.”
• Choice B is incorrect because the singular verb “is underlying” doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject “frameworks.”
• Choice D is incorrect because the singular verb “has been underlying” doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject “frameworks.”

• Choice B is the best answer. “Next” logically signals that the action in this sentence—the water spraying—is the next step in the resurfacing process, following the ice scraping mentioned in the previous sentence.
• Choice A is incorrect because “for example” illogically signals that the action in this sentence is an example of the action in the previous sentence. Instead, the water spraying is the next step in a process that begins with the ice scraping.
• Choice C is incorrect because “similarly” illogically signals that the action in this sentence is similar to the action in the previous sentence. Instead, the water spraying is the next step in a process that begins with the ice scraping.
• Choice D is incorrect because “in contrast” illogically signals that the action in this sentence contrasts with the action in the previous sentence. Instead, the water spraying is the next step in a process that begins with the ice scraping.

• Choice D is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of Carmen Lomas Garza’s artistic process. In this context, “inspired by” means influenced by or motivated by. The text refers to how, regardless of the scale of the work, Garza uses her memories of Texas and details from California to create her art. If Garza is basing her work on her direct experiences, then they play a part in her artistic process. This context thus suggests that Garza’s art is inspired by the experiences of her childhood in Texas and her current life in California.
• Choice A is incorrect because it wouldn’t make logical sense to indicate that Garza is “complimented by”—or praised by—something inanimate such as direct experience.
• Choice B is incorrect because describing Garza as “uncertain about”—or unsure or doubtful of—direct experience would suggest that she had misgivings about it. If Garza were unsure of her experiences, that would suggest that she couldn’t recall them, and Garza wouldn’t be able to represent direct experience in her art if she were uncertain of the memories or details.
• Choice C is incorrect because describing Garza as “unbothered by”—or uninterested in—her experience would imply the opposite of what the text suggests about Garza’s artistic process. The text indicates that Garza’s art comes from memories of her childhood in Texas and details of her surroundings in California.

• Choice D is the best answer because it most accurately states the main purpose of the text, which is to describe an experiment whose results cast doubt on an established hypothesis. The text begins by noting that researchers have long believed that woolly mammoths were hunted to extinction in North America by humans using spears with Clovis points. The text then describes an experiment conducted by an anthropologist to test this hypothesis. According to the text, the results of the experiment led the anthropologist to conclude that hunters using spears with Clovis points likely weren’t the primary cause of the extinction. The anthropologist’s results cast doubt on the long-held hypothesis presented at the beginning of the text and suggest that woolly mammoths may have become extinct in North America due to some other cause.
• Choice A is incorrect because there’s nothing in the text to suggest that researchers have been involved in an ongoing debate. On the contrary, the text suggests that most researchers agree on the cause of the woolly mammoth’s extinction in North America.
• Choice B is incorrect because the text never mentions any advantages or disadvantages of the method used in the experiment, focusing instead on the results achieved using that method.
• Choice C is incorrect because the text addresses only one hypothesis, that mammoths were hunted to extinction in North America by humans using spears with Clovis points. Rather than present a competing hypothesis, the text explains how one anthropologist designed an experiment to test this long-held hypothesis.

• Choice C is the best answer because it states a conclusion the researchers likely agree with, given the details in the text. The text explains that a biosignature gas is a gas that can be used as an indicator that a planet harbors some form of life and some astronomers have proposed that NH₃ could serve as a biosignature gas. The researchers evaluating this claim found that the atmosphere of rocky planets would be unlikely to reach “detectably high levels” of NH₃ without biological activity, which would support the proposal of NH₃ serving as a biosignature gas. However, the text also states that mini-Neptune planets can produce NH₃ in the absence of biological activity. Thus, the text is structured to lead to the conclusion that detectable levels of NH₃ in the atmospheres of rocky planets could constitute a biosignature, but that is not the case for detectable levels of the gas in the atmospheres of mini-Neptune planets.
• Choice A is incorrect because the text indicates that biological activity likely accounts for detectable levels of NH₃ in the atmospheres of rocky planets but mini-Neptune planets can have detectable levels of NH₃ in their atmospheres in the absence of biological activity. Therefore, both rocky planets and miniNeptune planets can have detectable levels of atmospheric NH₃.
• Choice B is incorrect because the text states that for NH₃ to reach detectable levels in the atmospheres of rocky planets likely means they harbor biological activity, meaning that rocky planets with detectable NH₃ usually harbor biological activity. However, that does not entail that every rocky planet with biological activity will have detectable levels of NH₃ in their atmospheres.
• Choice D is incorrect because the text claims only that some astronomers have proposed using NH₃ as a biosignature gas without mentioning a minimum concentration of atmospheric NH₃ that must be met for it to function as a biosignature gas.

• Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the coordination of main clauses within a sentence. This choice uses a semicolon in a conventional way to join the first main clause (“Clear… through”) and the second main clause (“wax…through”).
• Choice A is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. Without a conjunction following it, a comma can’t be used in this way to join two main clauses.
• Choice B is incorrect because it results in a run-on sentence. The two main clauses (“Clear…through” and “wax…through”) are fused without punctuation and/or a conjunction. Furthermore, it results in a confusing and illogical sentence that suggests clear glass allows light to pass through wax paper, which doesn’t make sense in this context.
• Choice D is incorrect because when coordinating two longer main clauses such as these, it’s conventional to use a comma before the coordinating conjunction.

• Choice D is the best answer. “Finally” logically signals that the actions in this sentence—the removal, cataloging, and analysis of artifacts—are the next and final steps in a process, following the previous actions of surveying, digging, recording, and mapping.
• Choice A is incorrect because “for instance” illogically signals that the actions in this sentence are an example of the actions in the previous sentence. Instead, the removal, cataloging, and analysis of artifacts are the next and final steps in a process.
• Choice B is incorrect because “on the contrary” illogically signals that the actions in this sentence are directly opposed to the actions in the previous sentence. Instead, the removal, cataloging, and analysis of artifacts are the next and final steps in a process.
• Choice C is incorrect because “earlier” illogically signals that the actions in this sentence occur before the actions in the previous sentence. Instead, the removal, cataloging, and analysis of artifacts are the next and final steps in a process.

Choice D is the best answer. Johnson collected “ephemera,” or things that are meant to be thrown away. Scholars thought his collection was worthless to them, then later realized that it was potentially valuable. This suggests that scholars went from disregarding ephemera to recognizing their usefulness.
Choice A is incorrect. This inference isn’t supported. The text tells us that the Bodleian Library acquired Johnson’s large collection of ephemera back in 1968, so we can assume that contemporary historians conducting research there do have access to that collection.
Choice B is incorrect. This inference isn’t supported. The text tells us that “Oxford University’s Bodleian Library acquired the collection,” but it never suggests that it was a challenge to do so.
Choice C is incorrect. This inference isn’t supported. The text actually suggests the opposite: the example of Johnson’s collection lends support to arguments that ephemera does hold value for scholars.

Choice D is the best answer because this quotation would best support the student’s assertion that the escape of transgenic fish from Brazilian fish farms into the wild may have significant negative long-term ecological effects. The text explains that transgenic fish have DNA that includes genetic material from other species, that some transgenic fish have genes from jellyfish that make them glow in the dark, and that glow-in-the-dark transgenic fish can now be found in the wild in Brazilian creeks. The quotation indicates why the escape of these fish may have negative long-term ecological effects: glow-in-the-dark transgenic fish might introduce fluorescence into wild fish populations by breeding with wild fish, causing wild fish to glow in the dark and thereby allowing predators to prey on them much more easily.
Choice A is incorrect because this quotation doesn’t mention any negative effects of the introduction of fluorescent transgenic fish into the wild. The quotation merely compares the ratio of females to males at two sites in the wild where transgenic fish have been observed.
Choice B is incorrect because this quotation doesn’t support the idea that the escape of fluorescent transgenic fish from Brazilian fish farms may have significant negative long-term ecological effects. Rather, the quotation suggests that more research is needed to understand the effects.
Choice C is incorrect because this quotation supports the idea that transgenic fish may be present in more ecosystems than has been observed; it doesn’t address whether the presence of fluorescent transgenic fish affects these ecosystems.

Choice A is the best answer because it presents a quotation about Elizabeth Catlett that supports the student’s claim that this artist had a talent for unifying various traditions and styles in her work. The quotation explains that to create the work, Catlett combined Indigenous sculpture with the visual aesthetic of modern muralists from Mexico as well as that of German artist Kathe Kollwitz. In other words, Catlett was able to unify several artistic traditions and styles within a single sculpture.
Choice B is incorrect because in discussing the technique and subject matter of Catlett’s collage, the quotation makes no reference to particular traditions or styles.
Choice C is incorrect because in describing the sculpture, the quotation doesn’t mention any artistic traditions or styles that Catlett may have synthesized to create the work.
Choice D is incorrect because in discussing Catlett’s prints of notable African American women, the quotation doesn’t characterize those prints as having fused different traditions or styles.

Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is colon use within a sentence. A colon used in this way introduces information that illustrates or explains information that has come before it. In this case, the colon introduces the following explanation of why some roundworms in the Southern Hemisphere move in the opposite direction of Earth’s magnetic field.
Choice B is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. A comma can’t be used in this way to join two long independent clauses (“Researchers…food” and “in…sources”) such as these.
Choice C is incorrect because it results in a run-on sentence. The two clauses (“Researchers…food” and “in…sources”) are fused without punctuation. Furthermore, the conjunction “while” fails to indicate that what follows is an explanation of why some roundworms in the Southern Hemisphere move in the opposite direction of Earth’s magnetic field.
Choice D is incorrect because it results in a run-on sentence. The two clauses (“Researchers…food” and “in…sources”) are fused without punctuation and/or a conjunction

Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The plural verb "were" agrees in number with the plural subject "ayllus," which are described as plural "family clans."
Choice A is incorrect because the singular verb "is" doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject "ayllus."
Choice B is incorrect because the singular verb "was" doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject "ayllus."
Choice C is incorrect because the singular verb "has been" doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject "ayllus."

• Choice B is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of Yaszek’s introduction to her science fiction anthology. In this context “overtly” means openly or without concealment. The text draws a contrast between the lack of “deliberately signaled” political themes in womenauthored science fiction from the 1920s to the 1960s and what Yaszek notes about women-authored science fiction from the 1970s. This contrast implies that the work from the 1970s did clearly reflect feminist political themes. In other words, the text indicates that unlike women who wrote science fiction in the 1920s to the 1960s, the women who wrote science fiction in the 1970s expressed overtly feminist themes.
• Choice A is incorrect. In this context “prudently” would mean cautiously, which might plausibly describe the women who wrote science fiction from the 1920s to the 1960s, in that they tended to avoid revealing their political views; however, the text contrasts these authors with the women writing science fiction in the 1970s, thereby suggesting that the authors writing in the 1970s were not restrained in that way.
• Choice C is incorrect because in this context “cordially” would mean politely, and nothing in the text indicates that politeness was a significant factor for women writing science fiction either from the 1920s to the 1960s or in the 1970s. The text draws a contrast between the lack of “deliberately signaled” political themes in women-authored science fiction from the 1920s to the 1960s and what Yaszek notes about women-authored science fiction from the 1970s. It’s unclear how “less deliberately signaled” politics and an increasing sense of politeness toward feminism would constitute a meaningful contrast.
• Choice D is incorrect because in this context, “inadvertently” would mean unintentionally, and nothing in the text suggests that Yaszek thought the feminist elements of the women-authored science fiction from the 1970s arose without deliberate effort.

• Choice B is the best answer because it most accurately describes the main purpose of the text, which is to establish that pianist Martha Argerich’s performances appear easy because of her work to prepare for them. The text begins by stating that Argerich plays in such a way that it looks like the music is coming to her naturally in the moment, without planning. It goes on to point out that despite her skill and experience, Argerich works tirelessly and treats each piece of music as if it is new each time she performs it, and that it is this preparation that causes her playing to appear relaxed and natural. These details establish that the purpose of the text is to assert that Argerich’s performances look effortless because of how she prepares for them.
• Choice A is incorrect because the text doesn’t address how Argerich selects the music she’ll perform; instead, it describes how she approaches a piece of music in preparation for a performance.
• Choice C is incorrect because the text doesn’t discuss kinds of music beyond stating that Argerich is a classical pianist, and it doesn’t mention Argerich actually encountering any music for the first time; it indicates only that she approaches a piece of music she is going to perform as if she has never played it before.
• Choice D is incorrect because the text doesn’t mention music that Argerich is actually performing for the first time, only that Argerich approaches the pieces she performs as if they are new each time; further, the text doesn’t characterize this approach as unique, or something only Argerich does.

• Choice A is the best answer because it best supports the researchers’ explanation of the results of rearranging a store’s layout. According to the text, Sam K. Hui and colleagues found that rearranging a store’s layout can encourage customers to make spontaneous purchases. The text states that the researchers explain that a change in layout causes shoppers to hunt for items’ new locations, which exposes the shoppers to more products and increases the likelihood that they’ll make an unplanned purchase. This quotation from a surveyed shopper indicates that the shopper spontaneously purchased a notebook while looking for cleaning supplies that weren’t in their usual place. The quotation therefore supports the researchers’ explanation that rearranging a store’s layout can lead shoppers to make unanticipated purchases.
• Choice B is incorrect because it doesn’t support the researchers’ explanation that rearranging a store’s layout can lead shoppers to make unanticipated purchases. Instead of attributing an unplanned purchase to a change in layout, the quotation notes that the shopper searched for but couldn’t find some items, and as a result the shopper purchased less, not more, than what was anticipated.
• Choice C is incorrect because the quotation attributes what was purchased to coupons that the shopper received, not to a new store layout. Thus, the quotation doesn’t support the researchers’ explanation that rearranging a store’s layout can lead shoppers to make unanticipated purchases.
• Choice D is incorrect because the quotation attributes what was purchased to the size and stock of the store, not to a new store layout. The shopper simply purchased products that the shopper wanted in a particular store because other stores didn’t carry those products, so the quotation doesn’t support the researchers’ explanation that rearranging a store’s layout can lead shoppers to make spontaneous purchases.

• Choice D is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of the Cretaceous pterosaur Tupandactylus navigans. The text first describes what paleontologists initially speculated to be true of T. navigans based on observing only fossilized skulls of the pterosaur rather than complete skeletons—namely, that T. navigans had an oversized head crest and that, like other pterosaurs, its main mode of movement must have been flight. The text goes on to describe what researcher Victor Beccari and his team concluded based on studying a nearly complete fossilized skeleton of T. navigans, which provided additional information that fossilized skulls alone could not. Beccari and colleagues determined that T. navigans had long hind legs, short wings, and an unusually long neck, in addition to the oversized head crest previously observed by paleontologists. Taken together, these characteristics would have made sustained flight difficult and upright walking comfortable, which would make T. navigans different from other pterosaurs that moved mainly through flight. Thus, Beccari and colleagues suggest that previously held speculations of paleontologists are inaccurate: that instead of moving mainly through powered flight, T. navigans likely flew for shorter distances and spent more time walking than researchers previously thought.
• Choice A is incorrect because Beccari and his team determined, based on their examination of a nearly complete skeleton, that T. navigans would have found “sustained flight difficult,” which would differentiate it from most other pterosaurs that moved mainly through flight. Therefore, Beccari’s team would not suggest that T. navigans flew for longer distances than did other pterosaur species with large head crests.
• Choice B is incorrect because the fossilized skeleton studied by Beccari and colleagues was notable for its short wings, and because no indication in the text is made that other pterosaurs were thought by paleontologists to be comfortable walking. Therefore, Beccari’s team would not suggest that T. navigans had longer wings than other pterosaur species considered to have been comfortable walking.
• Choice C is incorrect because the text indicates that Beccari and his team agree with the paleontologists mentioned earlier in the text that T. navigans had a large-crested head. Therefore, Beccari’s team would not suggest that T. navigans had a smaller head than researchers previously expected.