All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
GMAT Exam  >  GMAT Questions  >  In the Great Lakes, the blooms of phytoplankt... Start Learning for Free
In the Great Lakes, the blooms of phytoplankton are escalating rapidly because of the negligence of the authorities; therefore the waterbodies would soon be such dangerous levels of toxins that supplying potable water to surrounding states will be impossible.
  • a)
    the waterbodies would soon be
  • b)
    soon there may be
  • c)
    it will soon have
  • d)
    they may soon be having
  • e)
    the waterbodies will soon have  
Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
Clear all your GMAT doubts with EduRev
Verified Answer
In the Great Lakes, the blooms of phytoplankton are escalating rapidly...
Meaning Analysis
  • In the Great Lakes, the blooms of phytoplankton are escalating rapidly because of the negligence of the authorities;
  • therefore the waterbodies would soon be such dangerous levels of toxins
    • that supplying potable water to surrounding states will be impossible.
This sentence says that blooms of phytoplankton are increasing in the Great Lakes very fast. The reason for this rapid increase is the negligence of the authorities. The second part of the sentence says that soon levels of toxins will reach such dangerous levels that supply of drinking water to surrounding states will be impossible.
Notice that the sentence incorrectly states that “waterbodies would be such dangerous levels of toxins”.  This is illogical since waterbodies themselves cannot be levels of toxins.  The logical interpretation is that waterbodies can reach the stated levels of toxins. 
Error Analysis
1)    As pointed out in the meaning analysis, this sentence incorrectly states that waterbodies are themselves dangerous levels of toxins.    
2)    The use of “would” is incorrect in this sentence. Since the sentence is written in the simple present tense, “will” should be used to make a prediction about the future.
Answer Choices
the waterbodies would soon be
Incorrect: This choice has the errors pointed out in the error analysis.  
B
soon there may be
Incorrect:
This choice changes the meaning by now saying that there “may be” increase in levels of toxins, conveying the possibility of this action, but as per the original sentence, this action will definitely take place.
C
it will soon have
Incorrect:
Singular pronoun “it” does not agree in number with its plural antecedent “the Great Lakes”.
D
they may soon be having
Incorrect:
This choice repeats the meaning error of Choice B.  Also, use of future continuous tense is incorrect to present a point in time fact about the future.  
the waterbodies will soon have  
Correct:
This choice corrects the errors of choice A without introducing any new errors.
View all questions of this test
Most Upvoted Answer
In the Great Lakes, the blooms of phytoplankton are escalating rapidly...
Explanation:
The correct answer is option E: "the waterbodies will soon have." This answer choice accurately and clearly expresses the idea that the waterbodies in the Great Lakes will soon have dangerous levels of toxins.

Analysis of the given sentence:
The sentence describes the escalating blooms of phytoplankton in the Great Lakes due to the negligence of the authorities. It also states that as a result, supplying potable water to surrounding states will soon be impossible. The sentence needs to convey the idea that the waterbodies in the Great Lakes will soon have dangerous levels of toxins.

Options analysis:
Let's analyze each of the given answer choices to determine why option E is the correct one.

a) "the waterbodies would soon be"
This option suggests a conditional statement, implying that the waterbodies may or may not become dangerous in the future. However, the sentence requires a stronger assertion that the dangerous levels of toxins are inevitable.

b) "soon there may be"
This option introduces uncertainty by using the word "may." The sentence needs to convey a stronger sense of inevitability.

c) "it will soon have"
This option uses a singular pronoun "it" to refer to the waterbodies in the Great Lakes. However, since the sentence mentions "the waterbodies" in plural form, this option does not accurately represent the idea.

d) "they may soon be having"
Similar to option b, this choice introduces uncertainty with the word "may." Additionally, the phrase "be having" is awkward and does not fit well in the sentence.

e) "the waterbodies will soon have"
This option accurately expresses the idea that the waterbodies in the Great Lakes will soon have dangerous levels of toxins. It uses the future tense "will" to convey inevitability and maintains the plural form of "waterbodies" to match the subject of the sentence.

Conclusion:
Option E is the correct answer because it accurately and clearly conveys the idea that the waterbodies in the Great Lakes will soon have dangerous levels of toxins.
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Similar GMAT Doubts

Directions: Read the Passage carefully and answer the question as follow.Archaeology as a profession faces two major prob-lems. First, it is the poorest of the poor. Only paltrysums are available for excavating and even less is avail-able for publishing the results and preserving the sites(5) once excavated. Yet archaeologists deal with pricelessobjects every day. Second, there is the problem of illegalexcavation, resulting in museum-quality pieces beingsold to the highest bidder.I would like to make an outrageous suggestion that(10) would at one stroke provide funds for archaeology andreduce the amount of illegal digging. I would proposethat scientific archeological expeditions and govern-mental authorities sell excavated artifacts on the openmarket. Such sales would provide substantial funds for(15) the excavation and preservation of archaeological sitesand the publication of results. At the same time, theywould break the illegal excavator’s grip on the market,thereby decreasing the inducement to engage in illegalactivities.(20) You might object that professionals excavate toacquire knowledge, not money. Moreover, ancient arti-facts are part of our global cultural heritage, whichshould be available for all to appreciate, not sold to thehighest bidder. I agree. Sell nothing that has unique(25) artistic merit or scientific value. But, you might reply,everything that comes our of the ground has scientificvalue. Here we part company. Theoretically, you may becorrect in claiming that every artifact has potential scien-tific value. Practically, you are wrong.(30)I refer to the thousands of pottery vessels and ancientlamps that are essentially duplicates of one another. Inone small excavation in Cyprus, archaeologists recentlyuncovered 2,000 virtually indistinguishable small jugs ina single courtyard, Even precious royal seal impressions(35) known as/melekh handles have been found in abun-dance---more than 4,000 examples so far.The basements of museums are simply not largeenough to store the artifacts that are likely to be discov-ered in the future. There is not enough money even to(40) catalogue the finds; as a result, they cannot be foundagain and become as inaccessible as if they had neverbeen discovered. Indeed, with the help of a computer,sold artifacts could be more accessible than are thepieces stored in bulging museum basements. Prior to(45) sale, each could be photographed and the list of thepurchasers could be maintained on the computer Apurchaser could even be required to agree to return thepiece if it should become needed for scientific purposes.It would be unrealistic to suggest that illegal digging(50) would stop if artifacts were sold on the open market.But the demand for the clandestine product would besubstantially reduced. Who would want an unmarkedpot when another was available whose provenance wasknown, and that was dated stratigraphically by theprofessional archaeologist who excavated it?Q.The author anticipates which of the following initial objections to the adoption of his proposal?

Directions: Read the Passage carefully and answer the question as follow.Archaeology as a profession faces two major prob-lems. First, it is the poorest of the poor. Only paltrysums are available for excavating and even less is avail-able for publishing the results and preserving the sites(5) once excavated. Yet archaeologists deal with pricelessobjects every day. Second, there is the problem of illegalexcavation, resulting in museum-quality pieces beingsold to the highest bidder.I would like to make an outrageous suggestion that(10) would at one stroke provide funds for archaeology andreduce the amount of illegal digging. I would proposethat scientific archeological expeditions and govern-mental authorities sell excavated artifacts on the openmarket. Such sales would provide substantial funds for(15) the excavation and preservation of archaeological sitesand the publication of results. At the same time, theywould break the illegal excavator’s grip on the market,thereby decreasing the inducement to engage in illegalactivities.(20) You might object that professionals excavate toacquire knowledge, not money. Moreover, ancient arti-facts are part of our global cultural heritage, whichshould be available for all to appreciate, not sold to thehighest bidder. I agree. Sell nothing that has unique(25) artistic merit or scientific value. But, you might reply,everything that comes our of the ground has scientificvalue. Here we part company. Theoretically, you may becorrect in claiming that every artifact has potential scien-tific value. Practically, you are wrong.(30)I refer to the thousands of pottery vessels and ancientlamps that are essentially duplicates of one another. Inone small excavation in Cyprus, archaeologists recentlyuncovered 2,000 virtually indistinguishable small jugs ina single courtyard, Even precious royal seal impressions(35) known as/melekh handles have been found in abun-dance---more than 4,000 examples so far.The basements of museums are simply not largeenough to store the artifacts that are likely to be discov-ered in the future. There is not enough money even to(40) catalogue the finds; as a result, they cannot be foundagain and become as inaccessible as if they had neverbeen discovered. Indeed, with the help of a computer,sold artifacts could be more accessible than are thepieces stored in bulging museum basements. Prior to(45) sale, each could be photographed and the list of thepurchasers could be maintained on the computer Apurchaser could even be required to agree to return thepiece if it should become needed for scientific purposes.It would be unrealistic to suggest that illegal digging(50) would stop if artifacts were sold on the open market.But the demand for the clandestine product would besubstantially reduced. Who would want an unmarkedpot when another was available whose provenance wasknown, and that was dated stratigraphically by theprofessional archaeologist who excavated it?Q.The author’s argument concerning the effect of the official sale of duplicate artifacts on illegal excavation is based on which of the following assumptions?

Directions: Read the Passage carefully and answer the question as follow.Archaeology as a profession faces two major prob-lems. First, it is the poorest of the poor. Only paltrysums are available for excavating and even less is avail-able for publishing the results and preserving the sites(5) once excavated. Yet archaeologists deal with pricelessobjects every day. Second, there is the problem of illegalexcavation, resulting in museum-quality pieces beingsold to the highest bidder.I would like to make an outrageous suggestion that(10) would at one stroke provide funds for archaeology andreduce the amount of illegal digging. I would proposethat scientific archeological expeditions and govern-mental authorities sell excavated artifacts on the openmarket. Such sales would provide substantial funds for(15) the excavation and preservation of archaeological sitesand the publication of results. At the same time, theywould break the illegal excavator’s grip on the market,thereby decreasing the inducement to engage in illegalactivities.(20) You might object that professionals excavate toacquire knowledge, not money. Moreover, ancient arti-facts are part of our global cultural heritage, whichshould be available for all to appreciate, not sold to thehighest bidder. I agree. Sell nothing that has unique(25) artistic merit or scientific value. But, you might reply,everything that comes our of the ground has scientificvalue. Here we part company. Theoretically, you may becorrect in claiming that every artifact has potential scien-tific value. Practically, you are wrong.(30)I refer to the thousands of pottery vessels and ancientlamps that are essentially duplicates of one another. Inone small excavation in Cyprus, archaeologists recentlyuncovered 2,000 virtually indistinguishable small jugs ina single courtyard, Even precious royal seal impressions(35) known as/melekh handles have been found in abun-dance---more than 4,000 examples so far.The basements of museums are simply not largeenough to store the artifacts that are likely to be discov-ered in the future. There is not enough money even to(40) catalogue the finds; as a result, they cannot be foundagain and become as inaccessible as if they had neverbeen discovered. Indeed, with the help of a computer,sold artifacts could be more accessible than are thepieces stored in bulging museum basements. Prior to(45) sale, each could be photographed and the list of thepurchasers could be maintained on the computer Apurchaser could even be required to agree to return thepiece if it should become needed for scientific purposes.It would be unrealistic to suggest that illegal digging(50) would stop if artifacts were sold on the open market.But the demand for the clandestine product would besubstantially reduced. Who would want an unmarkedpot when another was available whose provenance wasknown, and that was dated stratigraphically by theprofessional archaeologist who excavated it?Q.The author mentions the excavation in Cyprus (lines 31-34) to emphasize which of the following points?

The fall of the Berlin Wall represented a political victory of the free market against a centrally planned economy.Though highly interventionist and dependent on international defense and industrial subsidy, West Germany was a model of economic expansion in the post-war era.East Germany, while relatively successful in comparison with other Eastern Bloc nations, was far behind West Germany with regard to the buying power of its people. It was hard to avoid obvious comparisons such as the fact that 1 in 4 East Germans did not even have an indoor toilet. Western German authorities were therefore committed to rapid integration of the two Germanys without resorting to massive controls on internal migration, external capital controls, or continuation of a large state-owned industrial sector.Other nations were already wary of a united Germany.France, a perpetual competitor, saw Germany’s size advantage increase overnight. In Gross Domestic Product (“GDP”) alone, an historical size advantage of 23% jumped to nearly 30%, with stronger growth promised when East Germany was fully integrated.Within Germany, there should have been no doubt that integration would be costly. The question was whether the government was up to the task. In Italy, for example, the central government has invested tremendous resources in promoting the economy of its underperforming Southern region. In contrast, in the United States, the local population bears the burden of varying economic performance. For example, the American South is allowed to exist with much higher rates of poverty and lower education than the rest of the nation.Rather than allow East Germany to fall into total disrepair, with millions fleeing to the West and a long-term negative impact on national GDP growth, West German authorities decided to try to spend their way out of the crisis, creating almost overnight an infrastructure in East Germany to provide a standard of living comparable to that in West Germany. The goal was to take an under-performing country and raise it to “first world” standards in only a few years. This goal would have been preposterous had not West Germany possessed the resources to accomplish the task.Q.The author mentions the United States most probably in order to

Top Courses for GMATView all

Top Courses for GMAT

In the Great Lakes, the blooms of phytoplankton are escalating rapidly because of the negligence of the authorities; thereforethe waterbodies would soon besuch dangerous levels of toxins that supplying potable water to surrounding states will be impossible.a)the waterbodies would soon beb)soon there may bec)it will soon haved)they may soon be havinge)the waterbodies will soon have Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
In the Great Lakes, the blooms of phytoplankton are escalating rapidly because of the negligence of the authorities; thereforethe waterbodies would soon besuch dangerous levels of toxins that supplying potable water to surrounding states will be impossible.a)the waterbodies would soon beb)soon there may bec)it will soon haved)they may soon be havinge)the waterbodies will soon have Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? for GMAT 2025 is part of GMAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the GMAT exam syllabus. Information about In the Great Lakes, the blooms of phytoplankton are escalating rapidly because of the negligence of the authorities; thereforethe waterbodies would soon besuch dangerous levels of toxins that supplying potable water to surrounding states will be impossible.a)the waterbodies would soon beb)soon there may bec)it will soon haved)they may soon be havinge)the waterbodies will soon have Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for GMAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for In the Great Lakes, the blooms of phytoplankton are escalating rapidly because of the negligence of the authorities; thereforethe waterbodies would soon besuch dangerous levels of toxins that supplying potable water to surrounding states will be impossible.a)the waterbodies would soon beb)soon there may bec)it will soon haved)they may soon be havinge)the waterbodies will soon have Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for In the Great Lakes, the blooms of phytoplankton are escalating rapidly because of the negligence of the authorities; thereforethe waterbodies would soon besuch dangerous levels of toxins that supplying potable water to surrounding states will be impossible.a)the waterbodies would soon beb)soon there may bec)it will soon haved)they may soon be havinge)the waterbodies will soon have Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for GMAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for GMAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of In the Great Lakes, the blooms of phytoplankton are escalating rapidly because of the negligence of the authorities; thereforethe waterbodies would soon besuch dangerous levels of toxins that supplying potable water to surrounding states will be impossible.a)the waterbodies would soon beb)soon there may bec)it will soon haved)they may soon be havinge)the waterbodies will soon have Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of In the Great Lakes, the blooms of phytoplankton are escalating rapidly because of the negligence of the authorities; thereforethe waterbodies would soon besuch dangerous levels of toxins that supplying potable water to surrounding states will be impossible.a)the waterbodies would soon beb)soon there may bec)it will soon haved)they may soon be havinge)the waterbodies will soon have Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for In the Great Lakes, the blooms of phytoplankton are escalating rapidly because of the negligence of the authorities; thereforethe waterbodies would soon besuch dangerous levels of toxins that supplying potable water to surrounding states will be impossible.a)the waterbodies would soon beb)soon there may bec)it will soon haved)they may soon be havinge)the waterbodies will soon have Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of In the Great Lakes, the blooms of phytoplankton are escalating rapidly because of the negligence of the authorities; thereforethe waterbodies would soon besuch dangerous levels of toxins that supplying potable water to surrounding states will be impossible.a)the waterbodies would soon beb)soon there may bec)it will soon haved)they may soon be havinge)the waterbodies will soon have Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice In the Great Lakes, the blooms of phytoplankton are escalating rapidly because of the negligence of the authorities; thereforethe waterbodies would soon besuch dangerous levels of toxins that supplying potable water to surrounding states will be impossible.a)the waterbodies would soon beb)soon there may bec)it will soon haved)they may soon be havinge)the waterbodies will soon have Correct answer is option 'E'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice GMAT tests.
Explore Courses for GMAT exam

Top Courses for GMAT

Explore Courses
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App for FREE
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup