The passage below is accompanied by four questions. Based on the passage, choose the best answer for each question.
Time and again, whenever a population [of Mexican tetra fish] was swept into a cave and survived long enough for natural selection to have its way, the eyes disappeared. “But it’s not that everything has been lost in cavefish . . . Many enhancements have also happened.” . . . Studies have found that cave-dwelling fish can detect lower levels of amino acids than surface fish can. They also have more tastebuds and a higher density of sensitive cells alongside their bodies that let them sense water pressure and flow. . . . Killing the processes that support the formation of the eye is quite literally what happens. Just like non-cavedwelling members of the species, all cavefish embryos start making eyes. But after a few hours, cells in the developing eye start dying, until the entire structure has disappeared. [Developmental biologist Misty] Riddle thinks this apparent inefficiency may be unavoidable.
“The early development of the brain and the eye are completely intertwined—they happen together,” she says. That means the least disruptive way for eyelessness to evolve may be to start making an eye and then get rid of it. . . . It’s easy to see why cavefish would be at a disadvantage if they were to maintain expensive tissues they aren’t using. Since relatively little lives or grows in their caves, the fish are likely surviving on a meager diet of mostly bat feces and organic waste that washes in during the rainy season. Researchers keeping cavefish in labs have discovered that, genetically, the creatures are exquisitely adapted to absorbing and storing nutrients. . . .
Fats can be toxic for tissues, [evolutionary physiologist Nicolas] Rohner explains, so they are stored in fat cells. “But when these cells get too big, they can burst, which is why we often see chronic inflammation in humans and other animals that have stored a lot of fat in their tissues.” Yet a 2020 study by Rohner, Krishnan and their colleagues revealed that even very well-fed cavefish had fewer signs of inflammation in their fat tissues than surface fish do. Even in their sparse cave conditions, wild cavefish can sometimes get very fat, says Riddle. This is presumably because, whenever food ends up in the cave, the fish eat as much of it as possible, since there may be nothing else for a long time to come. Intriguingly, Riddle says, their fat is usually bright yellow, because of high levels of carotenoids, the substance in the carrots that your grandmother used to tell you were good for your…eyes.
“The first thing that came to our mind, of course, was that they were accumulating these because they don’t have eyes,” says Riddle. In this species, such ideas can be tested: Scientists can cross surface fish (with eyes) and cavefish (without eyes) and look at what their offspring are like. When that’s done, Riddle says, researchers see no link between eye presence or size and the accumulation of carotenoids. Some eyeless cavefish had fat that was practically white, indicating lower carotenoid levels. Instead, Riddle thinks these carotenoids may be another adaptation to suppress inflammation, which might be important in the wild, as cavefish are likely overeating whenever food arrives.
Which one of the following results for the cross between surface fish (with eyes) and cavefish (without eyes) would invalidate Riddle’s inference from the experiment?
Correct Answer :
Only eyeless offspring had yellow fat
Solution :
The correct option is: Only eyeless offspring had yellow fat.
To understand why this result would invalidate Misty Riddle's inference, we first need to trace her thought process and the findings of her experiment as described in the passage.
Initially, Riddle hypothesized that the cavefish accumulated high levels of carotenoids (which cause their fat to turn bright yellow) specifically because they lacked eyes. Since carotenoids are utilized by eyes, her first assumption was that the fish were simply storing this substance because they had no eyes to use it.
To test this idea, researchers conducted an experiment crossing surface fish (which have eyes) with cavefish (which lack eyes). The results of this crossbreeding showed "no link between eye presence or size and the accumulation of carotenoids." As evidence, the researchers found that some eyeless offspring actually had white fat, indicating low carotenoid levels. Based on this lack of correlation, Riddle made a new inference: she concluded that carotenoid accumulation is not related to the absence of eyes. Instead, she inferred that it is a separate adaptation used to suppress tissue inflammation caused by the fish overeating whenever rare food sources wash into the cave.
If the experiment had instead resulted in a scenario where only eyeless offspring had yellow fat, it would establish a direct and exclusive correlation between lacking eyes and accumulating carotenoids. This outcome would strongly prove her initial, rejected hypothesis—that the buildup of carotenoids happens because the fish do not have eyes to use them. Consequently, this would completely invalidate her final inference from the experiment that there is no link between the two traits and that carotenoids are accumulated for the independent purpose of suppressing inflammation.
Access expert-curated educational resources and study materials—completely free.
Create, conduct, and manage professional online assessments with Mindyard. Perfect for teachers and institutes.
Copyright © 2026 Mindyard. All Rights Reserved.