OFFICIAL SAT II BIO June 2..

<p>That's why the question asks for the most effective control. A competing species would work forever, but a virus would not.</p>

<p>to afruff, why wouldn't a virus work forever? if you are going to assume some are going to be resistant, then why can you not assume that the starlings will outcompete/ win? + viruses mutate as well</p>

<p>Why would a competing species work forever? Isn't the goal to get the exotic species population under control so that the native species can thrive? I don't understand why you think the competing species would actually be beneficial. Please explain.</p>

<p>And ac37, I agree with you. There is definitely no guarantee that any of the starlings will even have a mutated gene that will let them survive.</p>

<p>btw nishants thats decking</p>

<p>What percentile was a score of around 680ish? A 50%ile i bet :(</p>

<p>@Sam I Am</p>

<p>There is always something resistant to a virus (I think). In a population (note: population in this content means over all of North America) this huger, there is bound to be several resistant birds.</p>

<p>I agree that the exotic bird was not a good answer, but it was probably the best.</p>

<p>Well what's done is done. I am 99% positive that virus was the correct answer, but I guess we'll find out when the test scores come back. And btw, you didn't explain why the exotic bird choice was better.</p>

<p>I said its the best by POE. If you're going by majority rule, the bird was the right answer. That's a logical fallacy I know, but it still has got some merit to it.</p>

<p>From my reasoning, i think the virus would kill ALL the birds because it said a lethal virus. Competition wouldn't kill all of them, just some of them, making it a better form of control.</p>

<p>Now don't attack me X_X
anybody know the 680 perecentile approximation?</p>

<p>i dunno bout u guys...but i'm feeling trappin and relocation</p>

<p>Trap and relocation is too tedious and wouldn't really solve anything. New brids or the same birds would just come back.</p>

<p>k theres a lot of stuff online about pathogen biological control, which includes viral. theres also a lot of stuff online about introducing predation, but it explicitly says only natural predation. did the answer choice specify if it was natural? b/c if it only said introduce new species i think that would be wrong.</p>

<p>at least we all agree thats an unfair question.</p>

<p>VERRYYY unfair question.
also, about the enzyme question that everyone seems to be saying is diffusion, wtheck was the question and the roman numeral choices? i really don't remember the specific question...was it a core question?</p>

<p>It didn't say lethal virus, it said SPECIFIC. And unfortunately, I don't think the CB go by majority rule. Trapping and relocating does nothing at all, it is just moving the birds around, not decreasing the population.</p>

<p>oh no i DEFINAATELY remember it saying something about a lethal virus.</p>

<p>(And I don't think it was an unfair question at all. X_X. And I KNOW nobody agrees with be on that, lol.)</p>

<p>If it wasn't a lethal virus, then it wouldn't do anything at all lol.</p>

<p>BAHH i really wanna know the curve, and especially whether or not the 80-74 raw score = 800 scaled is true or not.
i might need to retake...</p>

<p>I chose trap and relocate, because it made sense to bring them back where they came from. It seems like it's overruled though.</p>

<p>What should be considered to measure the rate of photosynthesis?
The rate of CO2 consumption?</p>