Question 35·Medium·Transitions
Marine biologist Dr. Kassidy Nguyen established a series of no-fishing zones around Palau’s reefs to reduce stress on marine ecosystems. After four years, fish populations in these protected areas had nearly doubled. _____, measurements of coral bleaching showed little improvement.
Which choice completes the text with the most logical transition?
For transition questions, first ignore the answer choices and decide on the relationship between the ideas: are they showing cause and effect, contrast, similarity, a sequence, or an example? Once you have that relationship in mind, quickly check each option’s basic meaning and eliminate any that don’t match (e.g., remove words that show result when you need contrast). Avoid choosing what merely “sounds good”; instead, make sure the transition accurately reflects how the second idea connects logically to the first.
Hints
Look at both sides of the blank
Read the full sentence before and after the blank and ask yourself: is the second part supporting, contrasting with, giving an example of, or showing a similar situation to the first part?
Notice the tone of each part
The first part describes a success (fish populations nearly doubled). The second part mentions that something else showed little improvement. How does that second idea feel compared to the first: similar, opposite, or a result?
Use the meanings of the options to eliminate
Think about what these transitions normally do: Consequently shows a result, For instance introduces an example, and Likewise shows similarity. Which type of connection does not fit the relationship between successful fish populations and little change in coral bleaching?
Step-by-step Explanation
Understand the two ideas being connected
Read the sentences on both sides of the blank:
- First idea: No-fishing zones were created, and fish populations nearly doubled (a positive result).
- Second idea: Measurements of coral bleaching showed little improvement (a negative or disappointing result).
So, the second sentence does not continue the good news; instead, it shows that a different measure (coral bleaching) did not improve much.
Decide what kind of relationship is needed
Ask: How does the second idea relate to the first?
- It is not a result of success (we would expect good news for that).
- It is not an example of the first idea.
- It is not similar to the first idea, because the first is positive and the second is disappointing.
Instead, the second idea contrasts with the first: fish did very well, but coral bleaching barely improved.
Match the relationship to the best transition
Now check each option against the contrast you identified:
- Consequently, = as a result (cause–effect) → wrong, because the lack of coral improvement is not the expected result of thriving fish populations.
- For instance, = for example → wrong, because the second sentence is not an example of the first; it describes a different, contrasting outcome.
- Likewise, = in the same way/similarly → wrong, because coral bleaching did not improve in the same way fish populations did.
- Nevertheless, = even so/however → this shows that although fish populations improved, coral bleaching did not improve much, which is exactly the contrast the passage sets up.
Therefore, the best transition is “Nevertheless,” (Choice B).