This IELTS Reading post focuses on all the solutions for IELTS Cambridge 14 Test 4 Reading Passage 3 which is untitled and about ‘Marine Debris’ or ‘Ocean Trash’. This is an aimed post for candidates who have major problems in finding Reading Answers. This post can guide you the best to comprehend every Reading answer without much difficulty. Tracing IELTS Reading answers is a slow process and I sincerely hope this post can assist you in your IELTS Reading preparation.
IELTS Cambridge 14 Test 4: AC Reading Module
Reading Passage 3:
The passage is without a title; about Marine debris or Ocean trash
Questions 27-33 (TRUE, FALSE, NOT GIVEN)
In this type of question, candidates are asked to find out whether:
The statement in the question agrees with the information in the passage – TRUE
The statement in the question contradicts the information in the passage – FALSE
If there is no information on this – NOT GIVEN
[For this type of question, you can divide each statement into three independent pieces and make your way through with the answer.]
Question 27: Rochman and her colleagues were the first people to research the problem of marine debris.
Keywords for this question: first people, research, problem, marine debris,
The answer can be found tracing lines 3-4 of paragraph no. 2. The writer says here, “… . Plenty of studies have sounded alarm bells about the state of marine debris; . .. ..”
This means scientists before Chelsea Rochman and her team have already alarmed the world about the problems of marine debris.
So, the answer is: FALSE
Question 28: The creatures most in danger from ocean trash are certain seabirds.
Keywords for this question: most in danger, ocean trash, certain seabirds,
We find the mention of ‘seabirds’ in paragraph no. 3 in line no. 2 as an example of what a study on marine debris could show. But we cannot find any such information which shows us of the most affected creatures.
So, the answer is: NOT GIVEN
Question 29: The studies Rochman has reviewed have already proved that populations of some birds will soon become extinct.
Keywords for this question: studies, Rochman, already proved, populations, birds, will, soon, extinct,
In lines 2-4 of paragraph no. 3, the author states, “…. . . 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.
So, the answer is: FALSE
Question 30: Rochman analysed papers on the different kinds of danger caused by ocean trash.
Keywords for this question: analysed, papers, danger, ocean trash,
The answer lies in paragraph no. 4, “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.. .. . . .”
These lines suggest that Rochman analysed 100+ papers on different angles of problems caused by ocean trash (marine debris).
So, the answer is: TRUE
Question 31: Most of the research analysed by Rochman and her colleagues was badly designed.
Keywords for this question: most of, research, badly, designed,
In paragraph no. 4, we have found that Rochman analysed 100+ papers. Then in paragraph no. 5 the writer states, “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.”
These lines indicate that 83 cases out of 100+ cases proved to be correct. IN the remaining cases there were faults.
So, the answer is: FALSE
Question 32: One study examined by Rochman was expecting to find that mussels were harmed by eating plastic.
Keywords for this question: expecting, find, mussels, harmed by eating plastic,
The answer for this question can be found in paragraph no. 6 in the beginning. “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.”
Here, the lines suggest that Rochman was hoping to find that mussels were getting affected by taking plastic but the study showed that it plastic did not stress (harm) the shellfish (mussels).
So, the answer is: TRUE
Question 33: Some mussels choose to eat plastic in preference to their natural diet.
Keywords for this question: mussels, choose to eat, plastic, preference, natural diet,
There is no such information that shows that some mussels take plastic as a choice of their regular food.
So, the answer is: NOT GIVEN
Questions 34-39: (Completing notes with ONE WORD ONLY)
[In this type of question, candidates are asked to write only one word/ no more than two words to complete a note on the given topic. For this type of question, first, skim the passage to find the keywords in the paragraph concerned with the answer, and then scan to find the exact word.]
Title: Findings related to marine debris
Studies of marine debris found the biggest threats were:
- plastic (not metal or wood)
Question 34: bits of debris that were __________ (harmful to animals)
Keywords for this question: bits of debris, harmful to animals,
We find the mention of ‘metal or wood’ and ‘animals’ in paragraph no. 8. Here, lines 2-3 says, “.. . Most of the dangers also involved large pieces of debris – animals getting entangled in trash, for example, or eating it and severely injuring themselves.”
Here, bits of debris = pieces of debris,
So, the answer is: large
Question 35: There was little research into ___________ e.g. from synthetic fibres.
Keywords for this question: little research, synthetic fibres,
The answer is in paragraph no. 9 in the opening. “But a lot of ocean debris is ‘microplastic’, or pieces smaller than five millimeters. These may be ingredients used in cosmetics and toiletries, fibers shed by synthetic clothing in the wash, or eroded . .. . . . .. . .. . . . Rochman’s group found little research on the effects of these tiny bits.. . .”
So, little research was done on microplastic.
So, the answer is: microplastic
Drawbacks of the studies examined:
Question 36: most of them focused on individual animals, not entire ____________
Keywords for this question: most of, focused, individual animals, not entire,
The answer is in lines 2-3 of paragraph no. 10. “.. . . . Many studies have looked at how plastic affects an individual animal, or that animal’s tissues or cells, rather than whole populations.”
So, the answer is: populations
Question 37: the __________ of plastic used in the lab did not always reflect those in the ocean
Keywords for this question: plastic, used in the lab, did not, always, reflect, ocean,
In lines 3-4 of paragraph no. 10, the writer mentions, “……. .And in the lab, scientists often use higher concentrations of plastic than what’s really in the ocean.”
Here, did not always reflect those in the ocean = than what’s really in the ocean
So, the answer is: concentrations
- there was insufficient information on
- numbers of animals which could be affected
Question 38: the impact of a reduction in numbers on the __________ of that species
Keywords for this question: reduction in numbers, species,
In the last lines of paragraph no. 10, the author says, “. . .. – or how deaths in one species could affect that animal’s predators, or the rest of the ecosystem.”
Here, deaths in one species = reduction in numbers
So, the answer is: predators
- the impact on the ecosystem
Question 39: Rochman says more information is needed on the possible impact of future __________ (e.g. involving oil)
Keywords for this question: possible impact, future, involving oil,
The first lines of paragraph no. 11 give us the answer. “ ‘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. ”
Here, affect = impact
So, the answer is: disasters
Question 40: Choosing the title
[This type of question asks you to choose a suitable title for the whole passage from three or four options. Generally, this question is found as the last question so you should not worry much about it. Finding all the answers for previous questions gives you a good idea about the title.]
What would be the best title for this passage?
A. Assessing the threat of marine debris
B. Marine debris: who is to blame?
C. A new solution to the problem of marine debris
D. Marine debris: the need for international action
Here, we have to make decision on which title goes best with the passage. Our reading of the passage for the questions 27-39 clearly indicates that the passage is about the research and its results and further suggestions on evaluating or assessing the threats of ocean trash or marine debris.
So, the answer is: A
Click here for solutions to Cambridge 14 Test 4 Reading Passage 1
Click here for solutions to Cambridge 14 Test 4 Reading Passage 2
