medium · LSAT Logical Reasoning
A science passage reports that the enzyme's catalytic efficiency, measured as k_cat/K_m, exceeded that of all previously characterized homologs by roughly two orders of magnitude.
Which one of the following is most strongly supported by the statement above?
- Every homolog characterized before this enzyme registered a lower catalytic-efficiency value than it did.
- The enzyme's catalytic efficiency is precisely two hundred times that of its single closest known homolog.
- No catalyst anywhere more efficient than this particular enzyme has ever once been found in microbiology.
- Later follow-up studies are quite likely to turn up homologs whose catalytic efficiency surpasses this one's.
- The enzyme's high efficiency results chiefly from an unusually low K_m rather than from a high k_cat.
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