hard · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Marine biologists detected DNA from the rare comb jelly in samples taken inside Harrow Lagoon, although repeated net surveys there found none. The same genetic variants were abundant in the offshore cove. Laboratory tests show that the jelly's free DNA remains detectable in seawater for at least eighteen hours. During each of the two days before sampling, a flood tide carried water from the cove through the lagoon's narrow inlet; drifters traversed that distance in under four hours. On ebb tides, water left by a different channel. Thus the lagoon samples contained biological material associated with the jelly, but the sampling method did not reveal whether intact jellies produced it within the lagoon.
The statements above most strongly support which one of the following?
- Comb-jelly DNA generally remains detectable in seawater for less time than a flood tide takes to reach the lagoon.
- The net surveys establish that no comb jellies were present anywhere in Harrow Lagoon when the water was sampled.
- The detected lagoon DNA proves that intact comb jellies entered Harrow Lagoon on one of the two flood tides.
- Every genetic variant detected in the lagoon must have originated from a single comb jelly.
- The DNA detected inside Harrow Lagoon could have been transported there from comb jellies living in the offshore cove.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these statements?
- The question type just described is best identified as which one of the following?
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed in that the argument
- The reasoning in the argument is flawed because the argument
- Which one of the following most accurately describes the relationship the statement establ
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- Which one of the following must be true given the statement above?