RC Passage 2 Explanation
This is an explanation for passage 2 of LSAT 68, the December 2012 LSAT. This passage is about secondary substances in plants. Secondary substances give plants their tastes and smells. They help attract insects or defend against them.
Insects and plants evolved together: plants found new ways to defend themselves, and insects evolved new ways to get around those defences.
This section has paragraph summaries and an analysis of the passage, links to the explanations for the questions are below.
Paragraph Summaries
- Primary substances are found in all plants. The secondary substances that plants have varies, but the same substances are found in related plants. Secondary substances cause tastes and smells.
- New secondary substances may be kept by natural selection if they attract helpful insects or repel predator insects.
- Plants and predatory insects are locked in an arms race. Insects specialize in their methods to overcome plant defenses. This reduces number of types of plants insects can eat.
Analysis
This passage is a neutral description of plant evolution and how insects guide the selection of secondary characteristics. It is not an argument.The paragraph summaries above have everything you need to know.
If you have trouble with scientific passages, you should realize the concepts are not that complicated.
It’s the language that’s difficult. Scientific terms hide simple ideas. Don’t read through quickly.
Instead, slow down and reread. I promise this material is within your capacity to understand. Spend a bit more time reading the passage, and you’ll be able to do the questions much faster.
Science Magazines Can Help
I normally don’t recommend outside reading for RC. But if you still have trouble with science passages, I recommend reading Science magazine or Nature. They’re scientific journals. Reading these will help get you comfortable with scientific language.
This is a detail oriented passage. The questions can be answered by finding specific lines in the passage. You can get faster at this. On review, practice finding lines that support or eliminate answers.
looks like you changed your advice. It use to be reading the economist
Good catch, you’re right. I wrote this over a year ago.
Though my advice hasn’t really changed. I’d recommend both science magazines and the Economist. I think I wasn’t recommending the Economist at this point because most people won’t go to the library and check out 20 back issues, which is what is required. But most people will buy a science magazine.