Answer of Ocean Trash/ Marine Debris with Explanation is taken from IELTS Academic Reading: Cambridge 14, Reading Test 4: Passage 2 and is aimed for candidates who have major problems in finding IELTS Reading Answers.
Download Link 1
Download Link 1
Answer of Ocean Trash/ Marine Debris with Explanation is divided into three parts for your ease of navigating answer, passage, and questions, all at the same time.
Answer of Ocean Debris/ Marine Trash with Explanation
Tips & Process for 27- 33
- The answers appear in the same order in the text as the order of the statements
- You don’t need to read the whole text. First, you will scan for keywords and then you’ll read in detail the section in which they’re located for the answer.
- There will be at least one of each answer type – True, False, Not Given. So, if you don’t have at least one of each when you’ve completed the question, you’ve made a mistake.
- Identify any words that qualify the statement, for example, some, all, mainly, often, always and occasionally. These words are there to test if you have read the whole statement because they can change the meaning. For example, ‘Coca-Cola has always made its drinks in the U.S.A.’ has a different meaning from ‘Coca-Cola has mainly made its drinks in the U.S.A.’
- The statements won’t be a word-for-word match to the information in the text. They will contain synonyms and paraphrasing. It’s the meaning that you are trying to match.
- Remember that at least one answer will be NG. This means that you will be searching for information that is not there.
- Don’t answer based on your assumptions
- If you can’t find the information you are looking for, then it is probably ‘not given’. Don’t waste time looking for something that is not there.
- If you have no idea what the answer is put ‘not given’. You probably have no idea because the answer is not there.
- Don’t write yes for True, No for false.
|27 False||Rochman, colleagues, marine, debris||Para 2, line 3||Scan for the keywords and synonyms: people, research, problem, marine debris.|
Now read these lines, “plenty of studies have sounded alarm bells about the state of marine debris” and that “Rochman and her colleagues set out to determine how many of those perceived risks are real”.
This implies that there has been other research on marine debris before Rochman and her colleagues, and they want to examine these previous studies.
|28 Not Given||most in danger, ocean birds,||Para 3, line 2||We cannot find any such information which shows us of the most affected creatures.|
|29 False||Rochman, already proved, populations, birds||Para 3, line 2||Now read this line, “For example, a study could show that certain seabirds eat plastic bags, and go on to warn that whole bird populations are at risk of dying out. ‘But the truth was that nobody had yet tested those perceived threats,’ Rochman says. ‘There wasn’t a lot of information’.”|
Here, the lines suggest that there wasn’t enough information to prove that populations of some birds would become extinct.
|30 True||papers, danger, ocean trash,||Para 4||Scan for the keywords and synonyms: analysed, papers, danger, ocean trash|
Now read this line, “Rochman and her colleagues examined more than a hundred papers on the impacts of marine debris that were published through 2013. Within each paper, they asked what threats scientists had studied – 366 perceived threats in all”
Found 366 perceived threats can be understood that these papers focused on various kinds of danger (threats).
|31 Flase||research, badly, designed||Para 4||Scan for the keywords and synonyms: research, badly, designed.|
Now read this line, “In 83 percent of cases, the perceived dangers of ocean trash were proven true. In the remaining cases, the working group found the studies had weaknesses in design and content which affected the validity of their conclusions – they lacked a control group, for example, or used faulty statistics.”
Here, remaining cases were fault means that 100-83= 17% fault. So, only 17% of the research analysed by Rochman and her colleagues was badly designed.
|32 True||find, mussels, plastic.||Para 6||Scan for the keywords and synonyms: , find, mussels, plastic.|
Now read this line, “Strikingly, Rochman says, only one well-designed study failed to find the effect it was looking for, an investigation of mussels ingesting microscopic plastic bits. The plastic moved from the mussels’ stomachs to their bloodstreams, scientists found, and stayed there for weeks – but didn’t seem to stress out the shellfish.”
Rochman said this study “failed to find the effect it was looking for”, so clearly it was looking for some effect of the plastic on the mussels.
|33 Not Given||Para 6||There is no information which shows that some mussels take plastic as a choice of their regular food.|
|34 large||bits, debris, harmful, animals||Para 8, line 2||Scan for the keywords and synonyms: bits of debris, harmful to animals.|
Now read this line, “Most of the dangers also involved large pieces of debris – animals getting entangled in trash, for example, or eating it and severely injuring themselves.”
|35 microplastic||little research, synthetic fibres||Para 9||Scan for the keywords and synonyms: little research, synthetic fibres, |
Now read this line, “But a lot of ocean debris is ‘microplastic’, or pieces smaller than five millimeters. Rochman’s group found little research on the effects of these tiny bits”
These tiny bits refer to microplastic.
|36 Population||focused, individual animals, entire||Para 10, line 2||Scan for the keywords and synonyms: most of, focused, individual animals, not entire.|
Now read this line, “Many studies have looked at how plastic affects an individual animal, or that animal’s tissues or cells, rather than whole populations.”
|37 concentrations||plastic, lab, always, reflect, ocean||Para 10, line 3||Scan for the keywords and synonyms: plastic, lab, not, reflect, ocean|
Now read this ,”And in the lab, scientists often use higher concentrations of plastic than what’s really in the ocean.”
This means that the concentrations of plastic used in the lab was different from, and thus did not always correctly reflect, those in the ocean.
|38 predators||impact, reduction, numbers, species||Scan for the keywords and synonyms: impact, reduction, numbers, species|
Now read this line, “how deaths in one species could affect that animal’s predators”.
Deaths in one species can be understood as a reduction in numbers of that species.
|39 disasters||possible impact, future, involving oil||Para 11||Scan for the keywords and synonyms: possible impact, future, involving oil, |
Now read this line, “We need to be asking more ecologically relevant questions,’ Rochman say, Usually, scientists don’t know exactly how disasters such as a tanker accidentally spilling its whole cargo of oil and polluting huge areas of the ocean will affect the environment until after they’ve happened. ”
This means that more information related to disasters is needed.
|40 A||The entire passage concerns Rochman and her study on other prior research on marine debris. She assessed these studies to answer the question of whether the situation is as bad as they suggested. In other words, Rochman assessed the threat of marine debris mentioned by other researchers.|