- Joined
- Jan 16, 2016
- Messages
- 14
- Reaction score
- 2
Hey everyone,
I just went through a practice test, but am not happy with one of the answers given (taken from DAT Bootcamp):
Relevent Part of Passage: “In experiments that used homogeneous aerosolized influenza virus suspensions, virus infectivity at a fixed relative humidity undergoes an exponential decay. This decay is characterized by very low death rate constants, provided that a low relative humidity was given.”
"Aerosolized influenza virus suspensions undergo an exponential decay at a low relative humidity because this environment results in very low death rate constants."
Answer:
"Paragraph 4 states, “In experiments that used homogeneous aerosolized influenza virus suspensions, virus infectivity at a fixed relative humidity undergoes an exponential decay. This decay is characterized by very low death rate constants, provided that a low relative humidity was given.” Essentially, the passage is saying influenza viruses decay in high humidities and survive better in low humidities. The statement is saying influenza virus decays exponentially at low relative humidity, which is incorrect. The reasoning is correct however, because low relative humidities do result in very low death rate constants for the virus. (D) is the best answer."
Unfortunately, I disagree with the answer provided. It seems to me that virus infectivity undergoes exponential decay at a specified humidity. Whether this humidity is low or high, infectivity will still decay exponentially. It is just that, at low humidity, this exponential decay is very low.
As such I would have said both statement and reason are true but unrelated.
Can someone explain what I'm misinterpreting here? Is the decay at low humidity not exponential?
I just went through a practice test, but am not happy with one of the answers given (taken from DAT Bootcamp):
Relevent Part of Passage: “In experiments that used homogeneous aerosolized influenza virus suspensions, virus infectivity at a fixed relative humidity undergoes an exponential decay. This decay is characterized by very low death rate constants, provided that a low relative humidity was given.”
"Aerosolized influenza virus suspensions undergo an exponential decay at a low relative humidity because this environment results in very low death rate constants."
- A. Both the statement and reason are correct and related.
- B. Both the statement and the reason are correct but NOT related.
- C. The statement is correct but the reason is NOT.
- D. The statement is NOT correct, but the reason is correct.
- E. NEITHER the statement NOR the reason is correct.
Answer:
"Paragraph 4 states, “In experiments that used homogeneous aerosolized influenza virus suspensions, virus infectivity at a fixed relative humidity undergoes an exponential decay. This decay is characterized by very low death rate constants, provided that a low relative humidity was given.” Essentially, the passage is saying influenza viruses decay in high humidities and survive better in low humidities. The statement is saying influenza virus decays exponentially at low relative humidity, which is incorrect. The reasoning is correct however, because low relative humidities do result in very low death rate constants for the virus. (D) is the best answer."
Unfortunately, I disagree with the answer provided. It seems to me that virus infectivity undergoes exponential decay at a specified humidity. Whether this humidity is low or high, infectivity will still decay exponentially. It is just that, at low humidity, this exponential decay is very low.
As such I would have said both statement and reason are true but unrelated.
Can someone explain what I'm misinterpreting here? Is the decay at low humidity not exponential?
