SAT OwlQuestion bank / Cross-Text Connections
Text 1: Many ecologists describe invasive species, plants and animals introduced to regions where they did not evolve, as one of the greatest threats to biodiversity. Invaders, they argue, often outcompete native species and should be removed wherever possible.
Text 2: Biologist Tessa Lindgren agrees that some invasive species cause serious harm, but she argues that the label is applied too broadly. Many introduced species, she notes, have settled into their new ecosystems without driving out native species, and some now provide food or shelter for native wildlife. Removing them, Lindgren argues, can sometimes do more harm than good.
Based on the texts, how would Lindgren most likely respond to the recommendation in Text 1 that invasive species be removed wherever possible?
She would argue that removal should be judged case by case, because not all introduced species are harmful.
She would agree that every introduced species should be removed.
She would claim that no invasive species cause any harm.
She would argue that native species should be removed instead of introduced ones.
Show answer and explanation
Answer: A
Lindgren accepts that some invaders are harmful but notes that many are not and some even help native wildlife. She warns that removal can do more harm than good. She would reject removing invaders "wherever possible" in favor of judging each case, choice A.
Choice C overstates her view; she explicitly "agrees that some invasive species cause serious harm."
Got it wrong? On SAT Owl, Owl looks at the answer you chose and explains the exact mistake, then gives you similar questions until it sticks. Get your predicted SAT score free.