Question 166·Medium·Cross-Text Connections
Text 1
In a 2022 study, ecologist Marisol Duarte credited the recent resurgence of aspen stands on the Northern Plateau to a trophic cascade initiated by the reintroduction of wolves. According to Duarte, aerial surveys revealed that new aspen recruitment tripled within a decade of the wolves’ return, during which time elk numbers fell by roughly 40 percent. Concluding that wolves curb elk browsing, she argues that predator restoration was the primary driver of forest recovery.
Text 2
Environmental scientist Raj Patel welcomes the growth of the Plateau’s aspens but disputes Duarte’s interpretation. Patel’s tree-ring analyses show that the highest growth rates coincided with an unusual string of cool, wet summers, conditions largely absent in the previous three decades. Moreover, Patel documents comparable aspen recovery in adjacent Beaver Valley, where wolves have yet to recolonize. He therefore contends that recent climatic shifts, not predator pressure alone, best explain the trees’ comeback.
Question
Based on the texts, how would Patel most likely critique Duarte’s conclusion?
For cross-text questions, first summarize each text’s main claim in a short phrase (e.g., "wolves cause recovery" vs. "climate causes recovery"). Then, focus on the relationship: is the second author agreeing, disagreeing, or adding a condition? Look for key contrast or agreement words (like "but," "however," "disputes," "instead") in the second text, and use them to predict the critique or connection in your own words before looking at the choices. Finally, eliminate options that add new details not in the texts or that get the tone (support vs. criticism) wrong.
Hints
Locate Duarte’s main point
In Text 1, find the sentence where Duarte explains why she thinks the aspens are coming back. What specific cause does she say is the primary driver?
Find what Patel disputes
In Text 2, look for the phrase that says Patel "disputes Duarte’s interpretation." What alternate explanation does he offer for the aspen recovery, and what evidence does he use?
Check tone and type of critique
Ask yourself: Is Patel agreeing or disagreeing with Duarte’s conclusion? Then eliminate any answer choices that sound like agreement or introduce reasons Patel never mentions.
Match evidence to wording
Look for an answer that matches Patel’s focus on cool, wet summers and similar aspen recovery in a nearby area without wolves. Which option captures that idea without adding new information?
Step-by-step Explanation
Understand Duarte’s conclusion in Text 1
In Text 1, Duarte claims that the primary driver of the aspen resurgence is a trophic cascade caused by wolf reintroduction. She cites two main points:
- Aspen recruitment tripled within a decade of the wolves’ return.
- Elk numbers fell by about 40 percent in that same period.
From this, she concludes that wolves reducing elk browsing led to forest recovery.
Identify Patel’s main disagreement in Text 2
Text 2 says Patel "welcomes" the aspen growth but "disputes Duarte’s interpretation." His evidence:
- Tree-ring analyses show highest aspen growth during a run of cool, wet summers.
- These conditions were largely absent in the prior three decades.
- There is similar aspen recovery in nearby Beaver Valley, where wolves have not returned.
He concludes that "recent climatic shifts, not predator pressure alone, best explain the trees’ comeback." So his critique is that Duarte is over-crediting wolves and underestimating climate.
Translate Patel’s critique into the kind of answer choice to look for
Any correct answer must:
- Reflect disagreement with Duarte (not praise).
- Emphasize that Duarte is missing or downplaying climate evidence.
- Be consistent with Patel’s claim that climatic shifts explain recovery better than wolves alone.
Eliminate choices that introduce new complaints not supported by Text 2 (like outdated data) or that contradict Patel’s actual claims (like saying elk did not decline).
Match Patel’s reasoning to the specific answer choice
Check each option:
- A says Duarte’s conclusion is flawed because it overlooks regional climate data that align with the aspen resurgence. This directly matches Patel’s evidence about cool, wet summers and similar recovery in a wolf-free valley, and his claim that climatic shifts best explain the comeback.
- B has Patel praising Duarte and talks about areas unaffected by rainfall patterns, which contradicts his critical tone and his focus on cool, wet summers.
- C criticizes outdated aerial surveys, which are never mentioned by Patel.
- D claims elk numbers did not decline, but Patel never says that; he accepts the recovery but challenges the cause.
Therefore, the correct answer is A) By asserting that it overlooks regional climate data that align with the aspen resurgence.