UPSC Prelims CSAT Mock Test - 26 - UPSC MCQ

Four people of different nationalities live on the same side of a street in four houses each of different colour. Each person has a different favourite drink. The following addition information is also known : 
A. The Englishman lives in the red house. 
B. The Italian drinks tea. 
C. The Norwegian lives in the first house on the left. 
D. In the second house from the right they drink milk. 
E. The Norweigan lives adjacent to the blue house. 
F. The Spaniard drinks fruit juice. 
G. Tea is drunk in the blue house. 
H. The white house is to the right of the red house. 
I. Coca is drunk in the yellow house.

Q. Milk is drunk by :

Four people of different nationalities live on the same side of a street in four houses each of different colour. Each person has a different favourite drink. The following addition information is also known : 
A. The Englishman lives in the red house. 
B. The Italian drinks tea. 
C. The Norwegian lives in the first house on the left. 
D. In the second house from the right they drink milk. 
E. The Norweigan lives adjacent to the blue house. 
F. The Spaniard drinks fruit juice. 
G. Tea is drunk in the blue house. 
H. The white house is to the right of the red house. 
I. Coca is drunk in the yellow house.

Q. The Norwegian drinks :

Four people of different nationalities live on the same side of a street in four houses each of different colour. Each person has a different favourite drink. The following addition information is also known : 
A. The Englishman lives in the red house. 
B. The Italian drinks tea. 
C. The Norwegian lives in the first house on the left. 
D. In the second house from the right they drink milk. 
E. The Norweigan lives adjacent to the blue house. 
F. The Spaniard drinks fruit juice. 
G. Tea is drunk in the blue house. 
H. The white house is to the right of the red house. 
I. Coca is drunk in the yellow house.

Q. The colour of the Norwegian's house is :

Four people of different nationalities live on the same side of a street in four houses each of different colour. Each person has a different favourite drink. The following addition information is also known : 
A. The Englishman lives in the red house. 
B. The Italian drinks tea. 
C. The Norwegian lives in the first house on the left. 
D. In the second house from the right they drink milk. 
E. The Norweigan lives adjacent to the blue house. 
F. The Spaniard drinks fruit juice. 
G. Tea is drunk in the blue house. 
H. The white house is to the right of the red house. 
I. Coca is drunk in the yellow house.

Q. Which of the following is not true ?

Seven children - Raj, Suresh, Sheena, Mukesh, Nikita, Rohit, and Kavita - are eligible to enter a spelling contest. From these seven, two teams must be formed, a blue team and a yellow team, each team consisting of exactly three of the children. No child can be selected for more than one team. Team selection is subject to the following restrictions:
If Mukesh is one the blue team, Sheena must be selected for the yellow team. 
If Raj is on the blue team, Nikita, if selected, must be on the yellow team. 
Nikita cannot be on the same team as Rohit. 
Suresh cannot be on the same team as Sheena.

Q. Which of the following can be the three members of the blue team?

Seven children - Raj, Suresh, Sheena, Mukesh, Nikita, Rohit, and Kavita - are eligible to enter a spelling contest. From these seven, two teams must be formed, a blue team and a yellow team, each team consisting of exactly three of the children. No child can be selected for more than one team. Team selection is subject to the following restrictions:
If Mukesh is one the blue team, Sheena must be selected for the yellow team. 
If Raj is on the blue team, Nikita, if selected, must be on the yellow team. 
Nikita cannot be on the same team as Rohit. 
Suresh cannot be on the same team as Sheena.

Q. If Mukesh and Raj are both on the blue team, the yellow team can consist of which of the following?

Seven children - Raj, Suresh, Sheena, Mukesh, Nikita, Rohit, and Kavita - are eligible to enter a spelling contest. From these seven, two teams must be formed, a blue team and a yellow team, each team consisting of exactly three of the children. No child can be selected for more than one team. Team selection is subject to the following restrictions:
If Mukesh is one the blue team, Sheena must be selected for the yellow team. 
If Raj is on the blue team, Nikita, if selected, must be on the yellow team. 
Nikita cannot be on the same team as Rohit. 
Suresh cannot be on the same team as Sheena.

Q. If Mukesh is on the blue team, which of the following, if selected, must also be on the blue team?

Seven children - Raj, Suresh, Sheena, Mukesh, Nikita, Rohit, and Kavita - are eligible to enter a spelling contest. From these seven, two teams must be formed, a blue team and a yellow team, each team consisting of exactly three of the children. No child can be selected for more than one team. Team selection is subject to the following restrictions:
If Mukesh is one the blue team, Sheena must be selected for the yellow team. 
If Raj is on the blue team, Nikita, if selected, must be on the yellow team. 
Nikita cannot be on the same team as Rohit. 
Suresh cannot be on the same team as Sheena.

Q. If Raj is selected for the blue team and Kavita is not selected for either team, then which of the following can not be a member of the yellow team?

A rectangular park is 200 by 150m. Two cross paths are to be made one parallel to the length and the other parallel to the breadth. The longer path is to be 3 m wide and the shorter is to be 2 m wide. The cost of grassing the remaining part of the park @ Rs. 1000 per ha is

The average weight of 8 persons of a family is increased by 1 kg when one of the members whose weight is 60 kg is replaced by a new person. The weight of the new person (in kg)is

The average score of a class of boys and girls in an examination is A. The ratio of boys and girls in the class is 3 : 1. If the average score of the boys is (A + 1), the average score of the girls is:

Fatima introduces Mr. Zakir to her husband and said that father of his brother is the only son of her grandfather. How is Fatima related to Mr. Zakir?

If Kamal says, "Ravi's mother is the only daughter of my mother", how is Kamal related to Ravi ?

Pointing to a photograph a woman says, "This man's son's sister is my mother-in-law." How is the woman's husband related to the man in the photograph ?

Pointing to a photograph, a man said, "I have no brother or sister but that man's father is my father's son." Whose photograph was it ?

Rajan is the brother of Sachin and Manik is the father of Rajan, Jagat is the brother of Priya and Priya is the daughter of Sachin. Who is the uncle of Jagat?

Hands of a clock are set such that both hands are coincident at a point showing 6 on the dial. The time the clock will show they are coincident again for the third time is

Eight friends A, B, C, D, E, F, G and H are sitting around a circle facing the centre. H is to the immediate left of E who is third to the right of B. C is second to the right of D and is not a neighbour of B. F is second to the right of G and is not a neighbour of C.

Q. Who is second to the right of E?

Set against a rural backdrop, 'Stench of kerosene' is the story of a couple, Guleri and Manak, who have been happily married for several years but do not have a child. Manak's mother is desperate to have a grandchild to carry on the family name. Hence, she gets Manak remarried in Guleri's absence. Manak, who acts as a reluctant but passive spectator, is meanwhile, informed by a friend that Guleri, on hearing about her husband's second marriage, poured kerosene on her clothes and set fire to them. Manak is heartbroken and begins to live as if he were a dead man. When his second wife delivers a son, Manak stares at the child for a long time and blurts out, "Take him away ! He stinks of kerosene."

Q. This is a sensitive issue-based story which tries to sensitise the readers about

Chemical pesticides lose their role in sustainable agriculture if the pests evolve resistance. The evolution of pesticide resistance is simply natural selection in action. It is almost certain to occur when vast numbers of a genetically variable population are killed. One or a few individuals may be unusually resistant (perhaps because they possess an enzyme that can detoxify the pesticide). If the pesticide is applied repeatedly, each successive generation of the pest will contain a larger proportion of resistant individuals. Pests typically have a high intrinsic rate of reproduction, and so a few individuals in one generation may give rise to hundreds or thousands in the next, and resistance spreads very rapidly in a population.
This problem was often ignored in the past, even though the first case of DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) resistance was reported as early as 1946. There is exponential increase in the numbers of invertebrates that have evolved resistance and in the number of pesticides against which resistance has evolved. Resistance has been recorded in every family of arthropod pests (including dipterans such as mosquitoes and house flies, as well as beetles, moths, wasps, fleas, lice and mites) as well as in weeds and plant pathogens. Take the Alabama leafworm, a moth pest of cotton, as an example. It has developed resistance in one or more regions of the world to aldrin, DDT, dieldrin, endrin, lindane and toxaphene. 
If chemical pesticides brought nothing but problems, - if their use was intrinsically and acutely unsustainable then they would already have fallen out of widespread use. This has not happened. Instead, their rate of production has increased rapidly. The ratio of cost to benefit for the individual agricultural producer has remained in favour of pesticide use. In the USA, insecticides have been estimated to benefit the agricultural products to the tune of around $5 for every $1 spent. 
Moreover, in many poorer countries, the prospect of imminent mass starvation, or of an epidemic disease, are so frightening that the social and health costs of using pesticides have to be ignored. In general the use of pesticides is justified by objective measures such as lives saved, economic efficiency of food production and total food produced. In these very fundamental senses, their use may be described as sustainable. In practice, sustainability depends on continually developing new pesticides that keep at least one step ahead of the pests pesticides that are less persistent, biodegradable and more accurately targeted at the pests.

Q. The evolution of pesticide resistance is natural selection in action. What does it actually imply?

Chemical pesticides lose their role in sustainable agriculture if the pests evolve resistance. The evolution of pesticide resistance is simply natural selection in action. It is almost certain to occur when vast numbers of a genetically variable population are killed. One or a few individuals may be unusually resistant (perhaps because they possess an enzyme that can detoxify the pesticide). If the pesticide is applied repeatedly, each successive generation of the pest will contain a larger proportion of resistant individuals. Pests typically have a high intrinsic rate of reproduction, and so a few individuals in one generation may give rise to hundreds or thousands in the next, and resistance spreads very rapidly in a population.
This problem was often ignored in the past, even though the first case of DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) resistance was reported as early as 1946. There is exponential increase in the numbers of invertebrates that have evolved resistance and in the number of pesticides against which resistance has evolved. Resistance has been recorded in every family of arthropod pests (including dipterans such as mosquitoes and house flies, as well as beetles, moths, wasps, fleas, lice and mites) as well as in weeds and plant pathogens. Take the Alabama leafworm, a moth pest of cotton, as an example. It has developed resistance in one or more regions of the world to aldrin, DDT, dieldrin, endrin, lindane and toxaphene. 
If chemical pesticides brought nothing but problems, - if their use was intrinsically and acutely unsustainable then they would already have fallen out of widespread use. This has not happened. Instead, their rate of production has increased rapidly. The ratio of cost to benefit for the individual agricultural producer has remained in favour of pesticide use. In the USA, insecticides have been estimated to benefit the agricultural products to the tune of around $5 for every $1 spent. 
Moreover, in many poorer countries, the prospect of imminent mass starvation, or of an epidemic disease, are so frightening that the social and health costs of using pesticides have to be ignored. In general the use of pesticides is justified by objective measures such as lives saved, economic efficiency of food production and total food produced. In these very fundamental senses, their use may be described as sustainable. In practice, sustainability depends on continually developing new pesticides that keep at least one step ahead of the pests pesticides that are less persistent, biodegradable and more accurately targeted at the pests.

Q. 

With reference to the passage, consider the following statements:
1) Use of chemical pesticides has become imperative in all the poor countries of the world.
2) Chemical pesticides should not have any role in sustainable agriculture.
3) One pest can develop resistance to many pesticides.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Chemical pesticides lose their role in sustainable agriculture if the pests evolve resistance. The evolution of pesticide resistance is simply natural selection in action. It is almost certain to occur when vast numbers of a genetically variable population are killed. One or a few individuals may be unusually resistant (perhaps because they possess an enzyme that can detoxify the pesticide). If the pesticide is applied repeatedly, each successive generation of the pest will contain a larger proportion of resistant individuals. Pests typically have a high intrinsic rate of reproduction, and so a few individuals in one generation may give rise to hundreds or thousands in the next, and resistance spreads very rapidly in a population.
This problem was often ignored in the past, even though the first case of DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) resistance was reported as early as 1946. There is exponential increase in the numbers of invertebrates that have evolved resistance and in the number of pesticides against which resistance has evolved. Resistance has been recorded in every family of arthropod pests (including dipterans such as mosquitoes and house flies, as well as beetles, moths, wasps, fleas, lice and mites) as well as in weeds and plant pathogens. Take the Alabama leafworm, a moth pest of cotton, as an example. It has developed resistance in one or more regions of the world to aldrin, DDT, dieldrin, endrin, lindane and toxaphene. 
If chemical pesticides brought nothing but problems, - if their use was intrinsically and acutely unsustainable then they would already have fallen out of widespread use. This has not happened. Instead, their rate of production has increased rapidly. The ratio of cost to benefit for the individual agricultural producer has remained in favour of pesticide use. In the USA, insecticides have been estimated to benefit the agricultural products to the tune of around $5 for every $1 spent. 
Moreover, in many poorer countries, the prospect of imminent mass starvation, or of an epidemic disease, are so frightening that the social and health costs of using pesticides have to be ignored. In general the use of pesticides is justified by objective measures such as lives saved, economic efficiency of food production and total food produced. In these very fundamental senses, their use may be described as sustainable. In practice, sustainability depends on continually developing new pesticides that keep at least one step ahead of the pests pesticides that are less persistent, biodegradable and more accurately targeted at the pests.

Q. Though the problems associated with the use of chemical pesticides is known for a long time, their widespread use has not waned. Why?

Chemical pesticides lose their role in sustainable agriculture if the pests evolve resistance. The evolution of pesticide resistance is simply natural selection in action. It is almost certain to occur when vast numbers of a genetically variable population are killed. One or a few individuals may be unusually resistant (perhaps because they possess an enzyme that can detoxify the pesticide). If the pesticide is applied repeatedly, each successive generation of the pest will contain a larger proportion of resistant individuals. Pests typically have a high intrinsic rate of reproduction, and so a few individuals in one generation may give rise to hundreds or thousands in the next, and resistance spreads very rapidly in a population.
This problem was often ignored in the past, even though the first case of DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) resistance was reported as early as 1946. There is exponential increase in the numbers of invertebrates that have evolved resistance and in the number of pesticides against which resistance has evolved. Resistance has been recorded in every family of arthropod pests (including dipterans such as mosquitoes and house flies, as well as beetles, moths, wasps, fleas, lice and mites) as well as in weeds and plant pathogens. Take the Alabama leafworm, a moth pest of cotton, as an example. It has developed resistance in one or more regions of the world to aldrin, DDT, dieldrin, endrin, lindane and toxaphene. 
If chemical pesticides brought nothing but problems, - if their use was intrinsically and acutely unsustainable then they would already have fallen out of widespread use. This has not happened. Instead, their rate of production has increased rapidly. The ratio of cost to benefit for the individual agricultural producer has remained in favour of pesticide use. In the USA, insecticides have been estimated to benefit the agricultural products to the tune of around $5 for every $1 spent. 
Moreover, in many poorer countries, the prospect of imminent mass starvation, or of an epidemic disease, are so frightening that the social and health costs of using pesticides have to be ignored. In general the use of pesticides is justified by objective measures such as lives saved, economic efficiency of food production and total food produced. In these very fundamental senses, their use may be described as sustainable. In practice, sustainability depends on continually developing new pesticides that keep at least one step ahead of the pests pesticides that are less persistent, biodegradable and more accurately targeted at the pests.

Q. 

How do pesticides act as agents for the selection of resistant individuals in any pest population?
1) It is possible that in a pest population the individuals will behave differently due to their genetic makeup.
2) Pests do possess the ability to detoxify the pesticides.
3) Evolution of pesticide resistance is equally distributed in pest population.

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Chemical pesticides lose their role in sustainable agriculture if the pests evolve resistance. The evolution of pesticide resistance is simply natural selection in action. It is almost certain to occur when vast numbers of a genetically variable population are killed. One or a few individuals may be unusually resistant (perhaps because they possess an enzyme that can detoxify the pesticide). If the pesticide is applied repeatedly, each successive generation of the pest will contain a larger proportion of resistant individuals. Pests typically have a high intrinsic rate of reproduction, and so a few individuals in one generation may give rise to hundreds or thousands in the next, and resistance spreads very rapidly in a population.
This problem was often ignored in the past, even though the first case of DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) resistance was reported as early as 1946. There is exponential increase in the numbers of invertebrates that have evolved resistance and in the number of pesticides against which resistance has evolved. Resistance has been recorded in every family of arthropod pests (including dipterans such as mosquitoes and house flies, as well as beetles, moths, wasps, fleas, lice and mites) as well as in weeds and plant pathogens. Take the Alabama leafworm, a moth pest of cotton, as an example. It has developed resistance in one or more regions of the world to aldrin, DDT, dieldrin, endrin, lindane and toxaphene. 
If chemical pesticides brought nothing but problems, - if their use was intrinsically and acutely unsustainable then they would already have fallen out of widespread use. This has not happened. Instead, their rate of production has increased rapidly. The ratio of cost to benefit for the individual agricultural producer has remained in favour of pesticide use. In the USA, insecticides have been estimated to benefit the agricultural products to the tune of around $5 for every $1 spent. 
Moreover, in many poorer countries, the prospect of imminent mass starvation, or of an epidemic disease, are so frightening that the social and health costs of using pesticides have to be ignored. In general the use of pesticides is justified by objective measures such as lives saved, economic efficiency of food production and total food produced. In these very fundamental senses, their use may be described as sustainable. In practice, sustainability depends on continually developing new pesticides that keep at least one step ahead of the pests pesticides that are less persistent, biodegradable and more accurately targeted at the pests.

Q. 

Why is the use of chemical pesticides generally justified by giving the examples of poor and developing countries?
1) Developed countries can afford to do away with use of pesticides by adapting to organic farming, but it is imperative for poor and developing countries to use chemical pesticides.
2) In poor and developing countries, the pesticide addresses the problem of epidemic diseases of crops and eases the food problem.
3. The social and health costs of pesticide use are generally ignored in poor and developing countries. 

Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

Chemical pesticides lose their role in sustainable agriculture if the pests evolve resistance. The evolution of pesticide resistance is simply natural selection in action. It is almost certain to occur when vast numbers of a genetically variable population are killed. One or a few individuals may be unusually resistant (perhaps because they possess an enzyme that can detoxify the pesticide). If the pesticide is applied repeatedly, each successive generation of the pest will contain a larger proportion of resistant individuals. Pests typically have a high intrinsic rate of reproduction, and so a few individuals in one generation may give rise to hundreds or thousands in the next, and resistance spreads very rapidly in a population.
This problem was often ignored in the past, even though the first case of DDT (dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane) resistance was reported as early as 1946. There is exponential increase in the numbers of invertebrates that have evolved resistance and in the number of pesticides against which resistance has evolved. Resistance has been recorded in every family of arthropod pests (including dipterans such as mosquitoes and house flies, as well as beetles, moths, wasps, fleas, lice and mites) as well as in weeds and plant pathogens. Take the Alabama leafworm, a moth pest of cotton, as an example. It has developed resistance in one or more regions of the world to aldrin, DDT, dieldrin, endrin, lindane and toxaphene. 
If chemical pesticides brought nothing but problems, - if their use was intrinsically and acutely unsustainable then they would already have fallen out of widespread use. This has not happened. Instead, their rate of production has increased rapidly. The ratio of cost to benefit for the individual agricultural producer has remained in favour of pesticide use. In the USA, insecticides have been estimated to benefit the agricultural products to the tune of around $5 for every $1 spent. 
Moreover, in many poorer countries, the prospect of imminent mass starvation, or of an epidemic disease, are so frightening that the social and health costs of using pesticides have to be ignored. In general the use of pesticides is justified by objective measures such as lives saved, economic efficiency of food production and total food produced. In these very fundamental senses, their use may be described as sustainable. In practice, sustainability depends on continually developing new pesticides that keep at least one step ahead of the pests pesticides that are less persistent, biodegradable and more accurately targeted at the pests.

Q. What does the passage imply?

Malnutrition most commonly occurs between the ages of six months and two years. This happens despite the child's food requirements being less than that of an older child. Malnutrition is often attributed to poverty, but it has been found that even in households where adults eat adequate quantities of food, more than 50 per cent of children-under-five do not consume enough food. The child's dependence on someone else to feed him/her is primarily responsible for the malnutrition. Very often the mother is working and the responsibility of feeding the young child is left to an older sibling. It is therefore crucial to increase awareness regarding the child's food needs and how to satisfy them.

Q. According to the passage, malnutrition in children can be reduced

Find the number of squares in the given figure.