medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
Farmers who switched from chemical fertilizers to organic compost saw a decrease in the number of pests in their fields. The farmers concluded that the organic compost contains natural substances that are toxic to the local pest population.
Which of the following is an assumption required by the argument?
- Organic compost is considerably more costly and more difficult to apply across a field than conventional chemical fertilizers.
- Local pests are unable to develop any lasting resistance to the natural toxic substances that are found in organic compost.
- The local pest population is the single chief factor presently limiting the crop yields for these particular farmers' fields.
- The drop in pests was not chiefly due to the removal of the chemical fertilizers that had previously drawn the pests in.
- Organic compost reliably supplies growing crops with substantially more usable nutrients than conventional chemical fertilizers do.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More LSAT Logical Reasoning practice
- 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?
- Which one of the following can be properly inferred from these premises?
- Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the authors' conclusion?
- Which one of the following can be validly inferred from the two conditionals above?
- 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