1.包含听说读写部分。
2.听力部分提供答案及听力原文。
3.口语部分只提供综合部分听力原文。
4.阅读部分提供答案。
|
阅读第146套第1篇Group Foraging |
|
https://shimo.im/docs/9030JP4JQVc4J5kw
Group Foraging Bluegill sunfish obtain food by flushing (forcing into the open)small aquatic insects from dense vegetation. Researcher Gary Mittelbach hypothesized that larger foraging (food searching)groups might flush out more prey and increase the average number of prey obtained per group member. He examined this hypothesis by experimentally manipulating the foraging group size of bluegill sunfish in a controlled laboratory setting. Mittelbach placed 300 small aquatic prey into a large aquarium containing juvenile bluegill sunfish. He examined the success of bluegills that were foraging alone, in pairs,and in groups (ranging from three to six bluegills). Mittelbach measured the number of prey captured per bluegill, and he found a positive relationship between foraging group size and individual foraging success (the larger the group, the greater the success) up to a group size of four fish.The increased feeding rate per individual was due to two factors.First, more prey were flushed when group size rose.Second, prey clumped together, so when one group member found prey, others swam over to this area and then often found food themselves. While increased group size in bluegills does benefit each individual forager in its intake of food (its per capita foraging success), there is no evidence to suggest that bluegill foragers hunt in any coordinated or cooperative fashion.The manner in which bluegills increase foraging efficiency in larger groups (that is, by flushing) is only one means of increased foraging efficiency through group living. For example, in a number of species, increased group size reduces the amount of time that any given individual needs to devote to antipredator activities-often, but not always, increasing per capita foraging success. The general relationship between group size and foraging success uncovered by Mittelbach has been found over and over in animal studies.For example,Scott Creel ran an analysis on foraging success and group size in seven species that hunt in groups.Overall, Creel found a strong positive relationship between per capita foraging success and group size. Individuals may cooperate with one another when hunting in groups.For example, when wild dogs hunt down an animal, it is a coordinated effort, with different members of the hunting pack playing different roles in the hunt: flushing the prey, making the initial attack,killing the prey, and so forth. In such cases, it is useful to separate the effects of cooperation from that of group size per se.To see how animal behaviorists disentangle such effects, let us examine hunting behavior in chimps. Cooperative hunting, or the lack of it, has been examined in chimp populations in the Gombe preserve in Tanzania,the Ma hale Mountains in Tanzania, and the Tai National Park in the Ivory Coast.The most comprehensive studies of cooperative hunting among chimps are those of Christophe and Hedwige Boesch, who compared hunting patterns across the Gombe and Tai chimp populations. Major differences in hunting strategies emerged between these populations. In Tai chimps, a positive relationship was found between hunting success and group size in what is called a nonadditive fashion.That is, adding more hunters to a group did not simply increase the amount of food by a fixed amount for each new hunter added.Rather,with each new hunter, all group members received more additional food than they did when the last new hunter was added to the group (up to a limit). In addition to these group-size effects, Christophe Boesch found evidence of cooperation in Tai chimp hunting behavior.Very complex, but subtle, social rules exist that regulate access to meat and assure hunters—that is, those that actually cooperate during the hunt—-greater success than those who fail to join a hunt. The situation was quite different with Gombe chimps—there was no positive relationship between group size and hunting success in chimps from this population.That is, no group-size effect was uncovered in the context of obtaining food. In addition, unlike in the Tai population, behavioral rules limiting a nonhunter’s access to prey were absent, and such individuals received as much food as those that hunted cooperatively. Part of the difference in hunting behavior in Tai and Gombe chimps may be due to the fact that the success rate for Gombe solo hunters was quite high compared with the individual success rate for chimps in the Tai population.
1.Bluegill sunfish obtain food by flushing (forcing into the open)small aquatic insects from dense vegetation. Researcher Gary Mittelbach hypothesized that larger foraging (food searching)groups might flush out more prey and increase the average number of prey obtained per group member. He examined this hypothesis by experimentally manipulating the foraging group size of bluegill sunfish in a controlled laboratory setting. Mittelbach placed 300 small aquatic prey into a large aquarium containing juvenile bluegill sunfish. He examined the success of bluegills that were foraging alone, in pairs,and in groups (ranging from three to six bluegills). Mittelbach measured the number of prey captured per bluegill, and he found a positive relationship between foraging group size and individual foraging success (the larger the group, the greater the success) up to a group size of four fish.The increased feeding rate per individual was due to two factors.First, more prey were flushed when group size rose.Second, prey clumped together, so when one group member found prey, others swam over to this area and then often found food themselves.
According to paragraph 1, all of the following are true about Gary Mittelbach’s experiments on foraging group size EXCEPT: Negative Factual Information Questions否定事实信息题 AThe experimenter controlled the size of foraging groups. BThe experiments were conducted on fish in an aquarium rather than in a natural setting. CThe experiments confirmed Mittelbach’s hypothesis. DThe experiments used a total of 300 bluegill sunfish.
2.Bluegill sunfish obtain food by flushing (forcing into the open)small aquatic insects from dense vegetation. Researcher Gary Mittelbach hypothesized that larger foraging (food searching)groups might flush out more prey and increase the average number of prey obtained per group member. He examined this hypothesis by experimentally manipulating the foraging group size of bluegill sunfish in a controlled laboratory setting. Mittelbach placed 300 small aquatic prey into a large aquarium containing juvenile bluegill sunfish. He examined the success of bluegills that were foraging alone, in pairs,and in groups (ranging from three to six bluegills). Mittelbach measured the number of prey captured per bluegill, and he found a positive relationship between foraging group size and individual foraging success (the larger the group, the greater the success) up to a group size of four fish.The increased feeding rate per individual was due to two factors.First, more prey were flushed when group size rose.Second, prey clumped together, so when one group member found prey, others swam over to this area and then often found food themselves.
From the information in paragraph 1, it can be inferred that groups of five foraging bluegill sunfish Factual Information Questions事实信息题 Adid not have significantly greater foraging success than groups of four foraging fish Bwere found to have significantly less foraging success than pairs of foraging fish Ccaught different types of prey than fish that foraged alone Ddo not occur in natural settings
3.The general relationship between group size and foraging success uncovered by Mittelbach has been found over and over in animal studies.For example,Scott Creel ran an analysis on foraging success and group size in seven species that hunt in groups.Overall, Creel found a strong positive relationship between per capita foraging success and group size.
According to paragraph 3, how did Scott Creel’s analysis relate to Mittelbach’s experiments? Factual Information Questions事实信息题 AIt called into question the relationship between group size and foraging success uncovered by Mittelbach. BIt showed that Mittelbach’s conclusions were true for some other species in addition to bluegill sunfish. CMittelbach used it as the basis upon which he formed his hypothesis. DIt found that the general relationship between group size and foraging success uncovered by Mittelbach held true for only seven species.
4.Individuals may cooperate with one another when hunting in groups.For example, when wild dogs hunt down an animal, it is a coordinated effort, with different members of the hunting pack playing different roles in the hunt: flushing the prey, making the initial attack,killing the prey, and so forth. In such cases, it is useful to separate the effects of cooperation from that of group size per se.To see how animal behaviorists disentangle such effects, let us examine hunting behavior in chimps. Cooperative hunting, or the lack of it, has been examined in chimp populations in the Gombe preserve in Tanzania,the Ma hale Mountains in Tanzania, and the Tai National Park in the Ivory Coast.The most comprehensive studies of cooperative hunting among chimps are those of Christophe and Hedwige Boesch, who compared hunting patterns across the Gombe and Tai chimp populations. Major differences in hunting strategies emerged between these populations.
Which of the sentences below best expresses the essential information in the highlighted sentence in the passage? Incorrect choices change the meaning in important ways or leave out essential information. Sentence Simplification Questions句子简化题 AWild dogs coordinate their hunting efforts, with different dogs playing different roles to capture prey. BWild dogs are an example of a species that uses various techniques to hunt. CA hunting pack of wild dogs first flushes the prey, then makes an initial attack, then kills the prey. DIndividual wild dogs may cooperate with different members of the hunting pack during different parts of the attack.
5.Individuals may cooperate with one another when hunting in groups.For example, when wild dogs hunt down an animal, it is a coordinated effort, with different members of the hunting pack playing different roles in the hunt: flushing the prey, making the initial attack,killing the prey, and so forth. In such cases, it is useful to separate the effects of cooperation from that of group size per se.To see how animal behaviorists disentangle such effects, let us examine hunting behavior in chimps. Cooperative hunting, or the lack of it, has been examined in chimp populations in the Gombe preserve in Tanzania,the Ma hale Mountains in Tanzania, and the Tai National Park in the Ivory Coast.The most comprehensive studies of cooperative hunting among chimps are those of Christophe and Hedwige Boesch, who compared hunting patterns across the Gombe and Tai chimp populations. Major differences in hunting strategies emerged between these populations.
According to paragraph 4, which of the following is true about the studies of Christophe and Hedwige Boesch? Factual Information Questions事实信息题 AIn studying chimp hunting behavior, they failed to separate the effects of cooperation from those of group size per se. BThey discovered that chimp populations of the Gombe preserve practiced cooperative hunting, while Ma hale chimps and Tai chimps lacked it. CThey studied ways in which hunting strategies of wild dogs differ from hunting strategies used by chimp populations. DThey found important differences in the way that chimps of the Gombe preserve and chimps of the Tai National Park hunt in groups.
6.In Tai chimps, a positive relationship was found between hunting success and group size in what is called a nonadditive fashion.That is, adding more hunters to a group did not simply increase the amount of food by a fixed amount for each new hunter added.Rather,with each new hunter, all group members received more additional food than they did when the last new hunter was added to the group (up to a limit). In addition to these group-size effects, Christophe Boesch found evidence of cooperation in Tai chimp hunting behavior.Very complex, but subtle, social rules exist that regulate access to meat and assure hunters—that is, those that actually cooperate during the hunt—-greater success than those who fail to join a hunt.
The word “fixed” in the passage is closest in meaning to Vocabulary Questions词汇题 Asmall Bsuitable Cextra Dunchanging
7.In Tai chimps, a positive relationship was found between hunting success and group size in what is called a nonadditive fashion.That is, adding more hunters to a group did not simply increase the amount of food by a fixed amount for each new hunter added.Rather,with each new hunter, all group members received more additional food than they did when the last new hunter was added to the group (up to a limit). In addition to these group-size effects, Christophe Boesch found evidence of cooperation in Tai chimp hunting behavior.Very complex, but subtle, social rules exist that regulate access to meat and assure hunters—that is, those that actually cooperate during the hunt—-greater success than those who fail to join a hunt.
The word “subtle” in the passage is closest in meaning to Vocabulary Questions词汇题 Ahaving great influence Binteresting Cdifficult to detect Dstrict
8.The situation was quite different with Gombe chimps—there was no positive relationship between group size and hunting success in chimps from this population.That is, no group-size effect was uncovered in the context of obtaining food. In addition, unlike in the Tai population, behavioral rules limiting a nonhunter’s access to prey were absent, and such individuals received as much food as those that hunted cooperatively. Part of the difference in hunting behavior in Tai and Gombe chimps may be due to the fact that the success rate for Gombe solo hunters was quite high compared with the individual success rate for chimps in the Tai population.
Why does the author include the information that “the success rate for Gombe solo hunters was quite high compared with the individual success rate for chimps in the Tai population” Rhetorical Purpose Questions修辞目的题 ATo challenge the idea that Gombe chimps have more limited access to prey than Tai chimps do BTo provide evidence that Gombe chimps lack social rules about food sharing CTo suggest a reason why no relationship between group size and hunting success was found in Gombe chimps DTo explain why the size of Gombe chimp groups differs from that of Tai chimp groups
9.Bluegill sunfish obtain food by flushing (forcing into the open)small aquatic insects from dense vegetation. Researcher Gary Mittelbach hypothesized that larger foraging (food searching)groups might flush out more prey and increase the average number of prey obtained per group member. He examined this hypothesis by experimentally manipulating the foraging group size of bluegill sunfish in a controlled laboratory setting. Mittelbach placed 300 small aquatic prey into a large aquarium containing juvenile bluegill sunfish. He examined the success of bluegills that were foraging alone, in pairs,and in groups (ranging from three to six bluegills). Mittelbach measured the number of prey captured per bluegill, and he found a positive relationship between foraging group size and individual foraging success (the larger the group, the greater the success) up to a group size of four fish.The increased feeding rate per individual was due to two factors.First, more prey were flushed when group size rose. ⬛ Second, prey clumped together, so when one group member found prey, others swam over to this area and then often found food themselves. While increased group size in bluegills does benefit each individual forager in its intake of food (its per capita foraging success), there is no evidence to suggest that bluegill foragers hunt in any coordinated or cooperative fashion. ⬛ The manner in which bluegills increase foraging efficiency in larger groups (that is, by flushing) is only one means of increased foraging efficiency through group living. ⬛ For example, in a number of species, increased group size reduces the amount of time that any given individual needs to devote to antipredator activities-often, but not always, increasing per capita foraging success. ⬛
Look at the four squaresthat indicate where the following sentence could be added to the passage
On the contrary, the increase in exposed prey seems to be the simple result of a larger number of fish searching a larger area. Insert Text Questions句子插入题 Where would the sentence best fit？Click on a square sentence to the passage.
10.
Studies of animal foraging have shown several different means by which increasing group size leads to greater foraging success. Prose Summary Questions概要小结题 Select 3 answers AA larger foraging group can result in more prey being flushed and those prey being more easily captured , and it can also allow individuals to spend less time on antipredator activities. BSome researchers questioned Mittelbach’s findings and required many further studies before accepting that there is a general relationship between group size and foraging success. CResearch on several different populations of chimps has demonstrated that hunting is no more successful in groups with complex social rules than in groups without them. DD. Larger foraging groups tend to eat more of the food available in an area, so increasing the size of foraging groups does not always improve per capita foraging success. EAmong some chimps, all group members received more food when a new hunter was added, but cooperative hunters received a larger share of food than those that did not cooperate. FSome chimp studies showed that hunting success and group size are not necessarily related in chimps,suggesting that the value of group hunting varies depending on the specific conditions present.
|
|
阅读第146套第2篇Nutritional Changes in Human History |
|
https://shimo.im/docs/e1AzdxQdYRUJjzqW
重复时间 2021-01-13 2023-06-21 2024-04-08
Nutritional Changes in Human History Although we now think of an optimal diet as one that promotes longevity (long life), historically our optimal diet was whatever made us strong enough to have healthy children and then live long enough to help those children survive to do the same. The best measure of good nutrition is average height, which is about 80 percent genetic but is also strongly linked to childhood and adolescent calories and especially protein intake. Although big and strong people might out-hunt, out-gather, and even out-fight their smaller neighbors, they also need more calories. So people faced with chronic or recurrent food shortages are better off if they are short and lean. The small bodies of less-well-nourished humans are not only an effect of their lower intake of calories, protein, and calcium but also protection against the likelihood of even lower intakes in the future. By these metrics, our nomadic hunter-gatherer ancestors were remarkably well nourished. Remains from the Paleolithic Stone Age (2.6 mya to 10,000 ya) show that men had an average height of about 179 cm (5 feet 10% inches) and an estimated weight of about 67 kg (148 pounds). The women were substantially smaller, averaging an estimated 157.5 cm (5 feet 2 inches) and 54 kg (119 pounds). After agriculture began, about 10,000 years ago, in the Neolithic era, humans actually got smaller. Archaeological evidence suggests that the average Neolithic man was about 165 cm (5 feet 5 inches) tall and weighed 63 kg (139 pounds), while women were an average of 150 cm (4 feet 11 inches) and weighed 45 kg (99 pounds). Paleolithic men were bigger than modern European men through the end of the nineteenth century and were as big as they are today. And when the Europeans came to North America, as supposedly well-nourished invaders from the most technologically advanced countries in the world, the indigenous hunter-gatherer population of the American plains was far taller than they were. Why would that be the case? It all came down to nutrition. The plains diet of the hunter- gatherers centered around grass-fed wild bison, whose meat was less fatty than meat from modern corn-fed animals. And the plains tribes ate pretty much the whole animal. By comparison, even when agriculturalists’ crops provided enough calories to meet their energy requirements- -which probably were as high if not higher than those of hunter-gatherers because farmers often worked every day from dawn till dusk- _they didn’t provide as much protein or calcium as the hunter-gatherers’ diets did. Even nuts generally have more protein per ounce than grains, especially domesticated grains. This is why agriculturists also looked to legumes- -beans, peas, and even peanuts- for their protein, much as modern vegetarians do. But it’s a challenge to get enough protein from nonanimal sources, and it was even harder in the era before supermarkets. Nutrition continues to correlate with human height today. The economist Richard Steckel compared the height of people living in Europe from the ninth through the nineteenth century by measuring the length of their thigh bones, or femurs, which account for about 25 percent of our height. He estimated that an average man in the early Middle Ages (5th-10th century A.D.) stood 174 cm (5 feet 8/z inches). But by the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, when more people lived in cities, where there was less vitamin D (from exposure to sunlight) and fresh meat, the average man’s height had declined to 167 cm (5 feet 5%4 inches)- a reduction of over 6 cm (2/z inches). And by the early twenty-first century, better nutrition explains why the average height of young men in affluent European countries increased to about 178 cm (5 feet 10 inches) on average. In most societies, women are generally 10 to 13 cm (4 to 5 inches) shorter than men, regardless of the height of the men. In this context, the 21.5 cm (8%2 inch) difference in height between Paleolithic men and Paleolithic women was noticeably larger than the sex difference we’ve seen ever since. This large difference may have been because Paleolithic women didn’t fully share in the protein bounty of the hunt, or perhaps became pregnant at a younger age, when they were still growing, and their growth was stunted by having to share their protein and calcium with a developing fetus.
1.Although we now think of an optimal diet as one that promotes longevity (long life), historically our optimal diet was whatever made us strong enough to have healthy children and then live long enough to help those children survive to do the same. The best measure of good nutrition is average height, which is about 80 percent genetic but is also strongly linked to childhood and adolescent calories and especially protein intake. Although big and strong people might out-hunt, out-gather, and even out-fight their smaller neighbors, they also need more calories. So people faced with chronic or recurrent food shortages are better off if they are short and lean. The small bodies of less-well-nourished humans are not only an effect of their lower intake of calories, protein, and calcium but also protection against the likelihood of even lower intakes in the future. By these metrics, our nomadic hunter-gatherer ancestors were remarkably well nourished. Remains from the Paleolithic Stone Age (2.6 mya to 10,000 ya) show that men had an average height of about 179 cm (5 feet 10% inches) and an estimated weight of about 67 kg (148 pounds). The women were substantially smaller, averaging an estimated 157.5 cm (5 feet 2 inches) and 54 kg (119 pounds). After agriculture began, about 10,000 years ago, in the Neolithic era, humans actually got smaller. Archaeological evidence suggests that the average Neolithic man was about 165 cm (5 feet 5 inches) tall and weighed 63 kg (139 pounds), while women were an average of 150 cm (4 feet 11 inches) and weighed 45 kg (99 pounds).
The word“optimal’ in the passage is closest in meaning to Vocabulary Questions词汇题 Ahealthy Bideal Cnatural Dadequate
2.Although we now think of an optimal diet as one that promotes longevity (long life), historically our optimal diet was whatever made us strong enough to have healthy children and then live long enough to help those children survive to do the same. The best measure of good nutrition is average height, which is about 80 percent genetic but is also strongly linked to childhood and adolescent calories and especially protein intake. Although big and strong people might out-hunt, out-gather, and even out-fight their smaller neighbors, they also need more calories. So people faced with chronic or recurrent food shortages are better off if they are short and lean. The small bodies of less-well-nourished humans are not only an effect of their lower intake of calories, protein, and calcium but also protection against the likelihood of even lower intakes in the future. By these metrics, our nomadic hunter-gatherer ancestors were remarkably well nourished. Remains from the Paleolithic Stone Age (2.6 mya to 10,000 ya) show that men had an average height of about 179 cm (5 feet 10% inches) and an estimated weight of about 67 kg (148 pounds). The women were substantially smaller, averaging an estimated 157.5 cm (5 feet 2 inches) and 54 kg (119 pounds). After agriculture began, about 10,000 years ago, in the Neolithic era, humans actually got smaller. Archaeological evidence suggests that the average Neolithic man was about 165 cm (5 feet 5 inches) tall and weighed 63 kg (139 pounds), while women were an average of 150 cm (4 feet 11 inches) and weighed 45 kg (99 pounds).
Why does the author point out that“Although big and strong people might out-hunt, out-gather, and even out-fight their smaller neighbors, they also need more calories”? Rhetorical Purpose Questions修辞目的题 ATo argue that a smaller body size can be an advantage under some circumstances BTo support the claim that average height is strongly linked to childhood and adolescent calories and protein intake CTo provide evidence that our nomadic hunter-gatherer ancestors were remarkably well nourished DTo suggest that average height may not be the best measure of good nutrition
3.Although we now think of an optimal diet as one that promotes longevity (long life), historically our optimal diet was whatever made us strong enough to have healthy children and then live long enough to help those children survive to do the same. The best measure of good nutrition is average height, which is about 80 percent genetic but is also strongly linked to childhood and adolescent calories and especially protein intake. Although big and strong people might out-hunt, out-gather, and even out-fight their smaller neighbors, they also need more calories. So people faced with chronic or recurrent food shortages are better off if they are short and lean. The small bodies of less-well-nourished humans are not only an effect of their lower intake of calories, protein, and calcium but also protection against the likelihood of even lower intakes in the future. By these metrics, our nomadic hunter-gatherer ancestors were remarkably well nourished. Remains from the Paleolithic Stone Age (2.6 mya to 10,000 ya) show that men had an average height of about 179 cm (5 feet 10% inches) and an estimated weight of about 67 kg (148 pounds). The women were substantially smaller, averaging an estimated 157.5 cm (5 feet 2 inches) and 54 kg (119 pounds). After agriculture began, about 10,000 years ago, in the Neolithic era, humans actually got smaller. Archaeological evidence suggests that the average Neolithic man was about 165 cm (5 feet 5 inches) tall and weighed 63 kg (139 pounds), while women were an average of 150 cm (4 feet 11 inches) and weighed 45 kg (99 pounds).
According to paragraph 1, which of the following is a true statement about relative height differences in human history? Factual Information Questions事实信息题 AStone Age men were significantly taller than the first farmers. BNeolithic women were taller than Paleolithic women. CPaleolithic women were taller than Neolithic men. DThe height difference between men and women increased significantly after agriculture began.
4. Paleolithic men were bigger than modern European men through the end of the nineteenth century and were as big as they are today. And when the Europeans came to North America, as supposedly well-nourished invaders from the most technologically advanced countries in the world, the indigenous hunter-gatherer population of the American plains was far taller than they were. Why would that be the case? It all came down to nutrition. The plains diet of the hunter- gatherers centered around grass-fed wild bison, whose meat was less fatty than meat from modern corn-fed animals. And the plains tribes ate pretty much the whole animal. By comparison, even when agriculturalists’ crops provided enough calories to meet their energy requirements- -which probably were as high if not higher than those of hunter-gatherers because farmers often worked every day from dawn till dusk- _they didn’t provide as much protein or calcium as the hunter-gatherers’ diets did. Even nuts generally have more protein per ounce than grains, especially domesticated grains. This is why agriculturists also looked to legumes- -beans, peas, and even peanuts- for their protein, much as modern vegetarians do. But it’s a challenge to get enough protein from nonanimal sources, and it was even harder in the era before supermarkets.
Which of the sentences below best expresses the essential information in the highlighted sentence in the passage? Incorrect choices change the meaning in important ways or leave out essential information. Sentence Simplification Questions句子简化题 AAgriculturalists probably needed as many calories and more protein and calcium than hunter-gatherers because of their long workday. BEven when they worked every day from dawn to dusk, farmers may have found it difficult to get enough calories to fulfill their energy requirements. CBy comparison with agriculturalists, hunter-gatherers worked fewer hours to obtain all the calories, calcium, and protein that they needed. DEven in situations where agriculture- based diets provided enough calories, they still provided less protein and calcium than hunting and gathering did.
5.Paleolithic men were bigger than modern European men through the end of the nineteenth century and were as big as they are today. And when the Europeans came to North America, as supposedly well-nourished invaders from the most technologically advanced countries in the world, the indigenous hunter-gatherer population of the American plains was far taller than they were. Why would that be the case? It all came down to nutrition. The plains diet of the hunter- gatherers centered around grass-fed wild bison, whose meat was less fatty than meat from modern corn-fed animals. And the plains tribes ate pretty much the whole animal. By comparison, even when agriculturalists’ crops provided enough calories to meet their energy requirements- -which probably were as high if not higher than those of hunter-gatherers because farmers often worked every day from dawn till dusk- _they didn’t provide as much protein or calcium as the hunter-gatherers’ diets did. Even nuts generally have more protein per ounce than grains, especially domesticated grains. This is why agriculturists also looked to legumes- -beans, peas, and even peanuts- for their protein, much as modern vegetarians do. But it’s a challenge to get enough protein from nonanimal sources, and it was even harder in the era before supermarkets.
According to paragraph 2, when Europeans arrived in North America,they found out which of the following about the indigenous population? Factual Information Questions事实信息题 AThe indigenous people were farmers like the Europeans. BThe indigenous people had more-advanced technology than the Europeans. CThe indigenous people were taller than the Europeans. DThe indigenous people were not as well nourished as the Europeans.
6.Paleolithic men were bigger than modern European men through the end of the nineteenth century and were as big as they are today. And when the Europeans came to North America, as supposedly well-nourished invaders from the most technologically advanced countries in the world, the indigenous hunter-gatherer population of the American plains was far taller than they were. Why would that be the case? It all came down to nutrition. The plains diet of the hunter- gatherers centered around grass-fed wild bison, whose meat was less fatty than meat from modern corn-fed animals. And the plains tribes ate pretty much the whole animal. By comparison, even when agriculturalists’ crops provided enough calories to meet their energy requirements- -which probably were as high if not higher than those of hunter-gatherers because farmers often worked every day from dawn till dusk- _they didn’t provide as much protein or calcium as the hunter-gatherers’ diets did. Even nuts generally have more protein per ounce than grains, especially domesticated grains. This is why agriculturists also looked to legumes- -beans, peas, and even peanuts- for their protein, much as modern vegetarians do. But it’s a challenge to get enough protein from nonanimal sources, and it was even harder in the era before supermarkets.
hich of the following can be inferred from paragraph 2 about the diet of modern Europeans up through the nineteenth century? Inference Questions推理题 AMost Europeans got most of their protein from nuts. BMost Europeans were eating comparatively less meat than the indigenous peoples of North America. CEuropeans ate almost all parts of the animals they consumed. DEuropeans rarely ate beans, peas, or peanuts.
7.Nutrition continues to correlate with human height today. The economist Richard Steckel compared the height of people living in Europe from the ninth through the nineteenth century by measuring the length of their thigh bones, or femurs, which account for about 25 percent of our height. He estimated that an average man in the early Middle Ages (5th-10th century A.D.) stood 174 cm (5 feet 8/z inches). But by the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, when more people lived in cities, where there was less vitamin D (from exposure to sunlight) and fresh meat, the average man’s height had declined to 167 cm (5 feet 5%4 inches)- a reduction of over 6 cm (2/z inches). And by the early twenty-first century, better nutrition explains why the average height of young men in affluent European countries increased to about 178 cm (5 feet 10 inches) on average.
According to paragraph 3, which of the f0llowing is NOT a true statement from the historical record on changing human heights? Negative Factual Information Questions否定事实信息题 AEuropean men in the early Middle Ages were taller than men in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. BAs more and more people lived in cities, the average height decreased. CThe method that researchers used to measure height changed from the ninth through the nineteenth centuries. DToday, European men are about 178 cm (5 feet 10 inches) on average.
8.
Nutrition continues to correlate with human height today. The economist Richard Steckel compared the height of people living in Europe from the ninth through the nineteenth century by measuring the length of their thigh bones, or femurs, which account for about 25 percent of our height. He estimated that an average man in the early Middle Ages (5th-10th century A.D.) stood 174 cm (5 feet 8/z inches). But by the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, when more people lived in cities, where there was less vitamin D (from exposure to sunlight) and fresh meat, the average man’s height had declined to 167 cm (5 feet 5%4 inches)- a reduction of over 6 cm (2/z inches). And by the early twenty-first century, better nutrition explains why the average height of young men in affluent European countries increased to about 178 cm (5 feet 10 inches) on average.
Which of the following can be inferred from paragraph 3 about average height? Factual Information Questions事实信息题 AThe average height of people living in Europe has steadily increased from the ninth century through the nineteenth century. BThe length of the thigh bone, or femur, is not an accurate way of measuring average height in about 25 percent of cases. CAverage height differences around the world today are not related to nutritional differences. DReduced access to vitamin D can affect a population’s average height.
9.Although we now think of an optimal diet as one that promotes longevity (long life), historically our optimal diet was whatever made us strong enough to have healthy children and then live long enough to help those children survive to do the same. ⬛ The best measure of good nutrition is average height, which is about 80 percent genetic but is also strongly linked to childhood and adolescent calories and especially protein intake. ⬛ Although big and strong people might out-hunt, out-gather, and even out-fight their smaller neighbors, they also need more calories. ⬛ So people faced with chronic or recurrent food shortages are better off if they are short and lean. ⬛ The small bodies of less-well-nourished humans are not only an effect of their lower intake of calories, protein, and calcium but also protection against the likelihood of even lower intakes in the future. By these metrics, our nomadic hunter-gatherer ancestors were remarkably well nourished. Remains from the Paleolithic Stone Age (2.6 mya to 10,000 ya) show that men had an average height of about 179 cm (5 feet 10% inches) and an estimated weight of about 67 kg (148 pounds). The women were substantially smaller, averaging an estimated 157.5 cm (5 feet 2 inches) and 54 kg (119 pounds). After agriculture began, about 10,000 years ago, in the Neolithic era, humans actually got smaller. Archaeological evidence suggests that the average Neolithic man was about 165 cm (5 feet 5 inches) tall and weighed 63 kg (139 pounds), while women were an average of 150 cm (4 feet 11 inches) and weighed 45 kg (99 pounds).
Look at the four squaresthat indicate where the following sentence could be added to the passage
While it may seem difficult to determine the quality of the diet of people living long ago, there are physical signs that provide helpful clues. Insert Text Questions句子插入题 Where would the sentence best fit？Click on a square sentence to the passage.
10. Changes in average human height provide information about changes in nutrition throughout human history. Prose Summary Questions概要小结题 Select 3 answers AAdult height is partially determined by the calories, and particularly protein, eaten early in life, and a smaller body helps protect against starvation in places where food shortages are common. BWhile the hunter-gatherer diet was relatively rich in protein and calcium, the introduction of farming and urbanization led to a poorer diet and decreases in average height. CThe plains tribes of North America were taller than their European counterparts because they supplemented their diet of domesticated beans and peas with the meat of corn-fed animals. DAn average European man in the early Middle Ages was several centimeters shorter than men from the centuries immediately before or after, suggesting food shortages during these times. EWomen are 10 to 13 cm (4 to 5 inches) shorter than men on average,but the height difference during the Paleolithic era was much greater, perhaps because women ate less meat than men did. FNeolithic and Paleolithic men were particularly tall, whereas women on average were tallest from the seventeenth century to the present, probably because childbearing occurred later.
|
|
听力第146套 （mk 072） |
|
https://shimo.im/docs/RKAWMEReKYuGMMq8
MK072
听力音频：
https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/gCYijRAN5-C-FnggXgxgsg
C1
1 Why does the man go to see the professor? ATo suggest an idea for his research project. BTo tell her about his election to student government. CTo ask for her help on a political project. DTo discuss methods of gathering public opinion.
2 What is the professor’s attitude toward her involvement in student government as an undergraduate? AShe is grateful that the experience helped inspire her career choice. BShe regrets that her involvement took time away from her studies. CShe wishes that she had been more active than she was. DShe is glad that her involvement enabled her to help other students.
3 What is the student government’s main reason for conducting a straw poll? ATo educate students on the candidates’ positions. BTo remind students to vote in the upcoming election. CTo find out how students feel about the local referenda. DTo get an idea of students’ political preferences.
4 Why does the professor mention paper ballots? ATo show how a straw poll differs from an actual election. BTo stress the importance of keeping accurate records. CTo indicate that conducting a poll may present challenges. DTo suggest a way to improve communication between the student body and the student government.
5 Why does the professor discuss voting behavior on referenda? ATo encourage the man to vote on the local referenda. BTo help the man develop a focus for his term paper. CTo express her skepticism that voting behavior can be changed. DTo let the man know about her current research project.
L1
1 What is the lecture mainly about? ANew information about glass production and use in ancient Egypt. BWhether Egyptians or Mesopotamians were the first to invent glass. CDifferences between Egyptian glass and other kinds of glass. DReasons why ancient Egyptians imported glass from other countries.
2 What is the importance of the archaeological evidence recently found in Egypt? AIt supports the theory that ancient Egyptians imported glass from Mesopotamia. BIt proves that ancient Egyptians made glass objects prior to the Bronze Age. CIt provides the first evidence that glassmaking in the Bronze Age required two different stages. DIt shows that ancient Egyptians were producing raw glass.
3
The professor describes a process for making glass disks. Summarize the process by putting the steps in the correct order. Select 4 answers AGlass-like material is ground up and dyed blue or red. BPowdered material is heated at very high temperatures. CCrushed quartz and plant ash are heated at low temperatures. DContainers are broken to remove glass disks.
4 Based on the lecture, what are two kinds of glass objects that were valued in ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia? Select 2 answers ABeads. BCooking utensils. CContainers. DWindows.
5 According to the professor, what are two reasons why ancient Egyptians exported glass? Select 2 answers ATo build relationships with foreign leaders. BTo hold cooking oil that was sold in other countries. CTo get bronze tools from other countries. DTo acquire colors of glass not made in Egypt.
6 Why does the professor say this: ATo emphasize that glass objects were only made in ancient Egypt. BTo find out what the student does not understand. CTo indicate that there was no contradiction in her previous statement. DTo correct what she said in her previous statement.
L2
1
What is the lecture mainly about? AThe importance of classifying living organisms. BThe history of biological classification. CThe impact of the microscope on biological classification. DThe naming of newly discovered organisms.
2 Why does the professor describe “lumpers” and “splitters”? ATo emphasize one difference between early and modern biologists. BTo point out that early biological classifications were not based on scientific principles. CTo give examples of categories in early biological classification systems. DTo identify approaches that have shaped the development of biological classification systems.
3 What can be inferred about biologists before the time of Carolus Linnaeus? AThey did not agree on the names of many living things. BVery few of them used microscopes. CThey were puzzled by the discovery of microorganisms that lacked a nucleus. DThey had to be fluent in several languages in order to publish their research.
4 What does the professor mention as two characteristics of extremophiles? Select 2 answers AThey live in harsh environments. BThey are much larger than most other types of bacteria. CIn their structure they may resemble viruses. DIn their biochemistry, they may be similar to plants and animals.
5
What is the professor’s attitude toward the current system of biological classification? AShe is surprised that biologists have not changed the system for so many years. BShe is upset that so many unnecessary distinctions have been added. CShe is not confident that the system has been finalized. DShe is eager for biologists to adopt a completely new system
6
What does the professor imply when she says this: AThe microscope was developed specifically for the purpose of studying and classifying microorganisms. BThe invention of the microscope enabled scientists to confirm predictions about the characteristics of microorganisms. COrganisms discovered with early microscopes were classified according to categories that Aristotle established. DMicroscopes helped scientists clarify distinctions between the plant kingdom and the animal kingdom.
C2
1
What problem is the student having? AHis dormitory is in need of repairs. BHe does not have summer housing. CHe is bothered by construction on campus. DHe is not able to use the university library.
2
What does the student suggest that the construction workers do? AStop their project until summer classes are over. BStart their work later in the day . CWork on a different building. DWork on a different part of the library.
3 What does the woman imply about the construction plans? Select 2 answers AThey cannot be changed at this point. BIt is unfortunate that they were approved. CThey have been changed several times already. DThey were not approved until very recently.
4 What does the woman imply about moving students to another dormitory? AShe does not think it is necessary. BShe will need to get permission from the housing office. CStudents will have to wait until the dormitory is available. DStudents should contact the housing office for permission.
5
What does the student imply when he says this: AThe new library walls are not very attractive. BThe view from the student’s window is blocked by the construction. CThe construction is causing damage to nearby buildings. DThe construction is frustrating for many students.
L3
1
What is the main purpose of the lecture? ATo highlight realism’s causes and characteristics. BTo explore plot and character development in realist literature. CTo examine realism’s contribution to social change. DTo show how two realist authors influenced literature in the United States.
2 Why does the professor mention the scientific method and rational philosophy? ATo give examples of subjects commonly chosen by realist authors. BTo provide context for his discussion of realist authors. CTo explain how the realist style had an effect in areas unrelated to literature. DTo highlight changes in society that realist authors opposed.
3 According to the professor, what are three characteristics of realist literature? Select 3 answers ASentimental plot structure. BConcern for social change. CWell-developed characters. DUse of a narrator to complicate the plot. EUse of regional speaking styles.
4
According to the professor, what makes Life in the Iron Mills by Rebecca Harding Davis notable? AIt is unlike her other works. BIt led to many changes throughout society. CIt was one of the first examples of realist literature. DIt influenced the more famous works of Mark Twain.
5 What is the professor’s opinion of the writing of Rebecca Harding Davis? AIt is similar in quality to Mark Twain’s writing. BIt provides valuable insight about the time period. CIt was not successful in bringing about the changes it advocated. DDavis’ style was not as realistic as Twain’s.
6
What does the professor imply about literature in the United States prior to The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn? AIt did not yet have a distinct American style. BVery few books were published. CRomanticism and realism had started to combine. DBritish authors were using realism more than American authors were.
|
|
口语第146套（mt001） |
|
https://shimo.im/docs/WlArdJMePmfp7Nq2
综合部分听力音频： https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/C5ykE527NJAYl3AZ3ThV0Q
Task1
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
Parents should discourage their children from pursuing careers in competitive fields where success is not likely, such as professional sports or entertainment.
Use examples and details to explain your answer.
Task2
Leftover Baked Goods
The student center café often has baked goods like cookies and pastries in the display cases late at night, around closing time. I think after the café closes each night, these baked goods should be left out in the student center lounge for students to eat. The café doesn’t sell day-old baked goods, so I assume they’re ending up in the trash, and putting them out for students would save them from being wasted. Also, it could actually help increase sales at the café, since if students sampled the pastries and liked them, they’d be more likely to buy them at the café. Sincerely, Juliette Kinsbergen
The man expresses his opinion about the proposal described in the letter. Briefly summarize the proposal. Then state his opinion about the proposal and explain the reasons he gives for holding that opinion.
Task3
Nurse Plants
Young, developing plants are typically weaker than mature plants. Especially in harsh environments, young plants may be vulnerable to damage, and some resources they need for growth and survival may not be plentiful. In such cases, young plants may benefit from growing near certain older, more developed plants of another species that help them. Mature plants that serve this role are known as nurse plants . Nurse plants support the growth of young plants by providing shelter that protects the young plants from environmental threats. An additional benefit is that nurse plants supply resources that the young plants need to survive.
Explain how the example from the professor’s lecture illustrates the concept of nurse plants.
Task4
Using points and examples from the lecture, explain how a company can increase its profits.
|
|
写作真题第146套（rs071） |
|
https://shimo.im/docs/5xkGolx6dXhQnZkX
综合写作
题目原文：
The fossil record shows that members of the group of dinosaurs known as lambeosaurs had large bony crests on top of their heads The shape of the crests varied from species to species, but all lambeosaur crests contained extended hollow passages. No one really knows exactly what function the crests served, but scientists have offered several theories. Sense of smell One theory holds that the primary purpose of the crests was to improve the dinosaurs’ sense of smell. Examination of the fossils has suggested that the crests contained many blood vessels. The nose bones of modern animals with a highly developed sense of smell have a similar inner structure characterized by a high density of blood vessels. Thus, it is reasonable to conclude that the crests were primarily used to enhance the sense of smell.
Cooling A second theory maintains (hat the crests served to prevent overheating by lowering lambeosaurs1 body temperature. The addition of a crest had the effect of increasing the surface area of the lambeosaur’s body, thereby allowing body heat to escape more rapidly. Other warm-climate dinosaurs, stegosaurs for example, also had bony crestlike plates on parts of their body that increased the body surface area. It has long been believed that the bony plates of stegosaurs were adaptations to improve cooling, so it seems likely that the crests of lambeosaurs served the same purpose. Sound A third possibility is that lambeosaurs used the crests to make sounds, perhaps for communication with other lambeosaurs It was definitely possible to make low sounds by forcing air through the crests. This theory is supported by a finding suggesting that lambeosaurs had a good sense of hearing paleontologists recently discovered remains of a lambeosaur that had a highly developed inner ear. A good sense of hearing would be necessary for animals communicating by sound
题目音频：
学术写作
Doctor Achebe: As we have been discussing in class, deciding where to donate money is an important consideration when supporting charitable causes. Some prefer local charities where the impact may be more visible, while others favor international ones tackling issues on a broader scale. With this in mind, when donating money to charity, what factors do you take into account when choosing between local and international organizations?
Andrew:
I prefer to give to local charities rather than international ones. Local organizations where I live allow me to witness firsthand the impact my contributions make. The visible difference – even a small amount – motivates me to keep supporting groups creating visible change close to home.
Claire:
I believe supporting international charities is most impactful. Though local charities do good work, global issues like climate change and poverty affect millions more people. International groups have the scale and resources to drive systematic change on these pressing problems in ways smaller organizations simply can’t. Donating to major international charities can thus create widespread, meaningful impact.
|
