Anda di halaman 1dari 10

TLC Reading Exercise-2

IELTS

Read the following passages and answer the questions that follow.
So ran the limerick in the early days of relativity, when people, scientists as well as laypersons, were trying to come to terms with the strange notions of this theory. Although the former have accepted the theory, the latter still find it counter-intuitive. Which is why, news from princeton that the light speed barrier has been crashed, created ripples of excitement and prompted a lot of questions. Does this experiment mark the end of the reign for Einstein's special theory of relativity? Will this make it possible for us to ride a time machine into the past and future? Can causes follow.instead of precede effects? It is too early and also a little foolhardy to try to answer these questions when the scientific paper describing the experiment is still to be out. But while wait and see, let us also take a look at this whole issue of faster than light motion vis-a-vis the status of special relativity. It is not, in fact, difficult to visualise superluminal speeds even when Einstein's relativity is standing firm. You can yourself generate such speeds with the help of geometry. Take two rulers and place them on your table. In general; their inner edges (facing each other) will intersect if they are ex-tended. Now turn one ruler round until its inner edge is nearly parallel to the facing edge of the other ruler. The point of intersection of the two edges is now very far away, and will recede farther still as you turn the edge closer and closer to being parallel to the facing edge of the other ruler. And at some stage the point will recede faster than light. This is not against any result of relativity. Because, the point of inter-section has a geometrical existence only: it has no physical status. No material particle is sitting at that point. What relativity tells you is that no material particle can be made to move faster than light. More generally it tells us that no physical effect, no information, can be transmitted across space faster than light. So an abstract point of intersection of two straight lines traveling faster than light will not raise any eyebrows in the relativity community. Like mirages, the astronomer is accustomed to seeing things that are not there, knowing full well that peculiar situations can play tricks with observations. Superluminal motion is one such illusion. In the centres of some strong emitters of radio waves in the cosmos, there are tiny knots of concentrated energy being ejected outwards once in a while, like a smoker blowing out rings If the knot is moving transverse to the line of sight from the observer, then it is not difficult to estimate the knot's speed of outward travel. For that you have to know how far the radio source is from you. Astronomers are confident that they know these distances pretty well and so the calculation describe just now has been performed for man y such cases When this calculation was first performed, nearly three decades ago, the theorists were in for a. shock. The knots appeared to be moving faster than light. And, as it became clearer with the discovery of more such sources, the phenomenon was being repeated in many radio sources. So was this a cosmic challenge to relativity? Not necessarily so. A more mundane explanation may work. For ex-ample, if you have the knot move towards you almost along the line of sights the source, then you get the illusion that it is moving much faster than it actually does. By aligning the ejection very close to the line of sight, you can have the illusion of speed; say 20 times the real speed. So if the ejection is really at half the speed of light, the observer will see it at ten times the speed of light. . Another possible explanation could be that a gravitational lens is at work. Thats massive galaxy en route to the radio source could bend the tracks of radio waves such that the distance of the knot from the centre of the source appears enhanced. This is like looking at two points on a paper through an optical lens: the separation between the points gets modified. If these points start moving apart, a view through the lens will magnify the speed of their separation.

Having a gravity lens so realigned, or having ejection almost radially away may appear like contrived secessions. Does nature behave in such a perverse waybe generating such illsions? Or are these scenarios invented by the scientist to keep the myth of a light barrier intact? Numerous experiments with subatomic particles have shown that their dynamical properties do seem consistent with what special relativity says For example, the mass of a particle which measures its inertial resistance to any attempt to accelerate it, increases as it is made to move faster and faster. Einstein's formula tells us for example, that if the particle is moving at 60 percent of the speed of light, its mass will have increased by a quarter above its mass when at rest. And according to this formula, the mass increases to infinity as the speed approaches that of light. The greater the inertia the greater the force needed to increase the speed of the particle. This is just as well. For if you could energise material particles to superluminal speeds, then all kinds of logical paradoxes would be in store for you. The limerick about Miss Bright is one, for example. If by traveling faster than light you could travel back into the past, you could play havoc with the orderly system followed by nature. By going back far into the past and killing your grandfather before he had any children, you could render your own existence paradoxical. In the early 1960s, George Sudarshan, V K Deshpande and OMP Bilaniukhad proposed that nature does allow faster than light particles to exist; only they can never slow down to speeds less than the speed of1ight. Called tachyons, these particles can travel into the past. However, they cannot be used to send information or energy into the past and so they would to create paradoxical situations. They are, therefore, not inconsistent with special relativity. Do they exist? This is an open question to which the future holds the key. 1. According to the author, breaking of the speed barriers is an abstract idea. Which one among the following is not one of the reasons, he has given to support his view through geometry? A) At some stage, the point of intersection of two edges recedes faster than light has no physical existence and has only an abstract existence. B) Because no material particle is involved in geometrical calculation. C) According to the theory of relativity, no material particle can move faster than light. D) Theory of relativity discusses about non physical aspect of material 01 where mass is not involved. E) None of the above 2. How can you estimate the knot's speed of outward travel if you know the distance of the radio source? A) If the radio source is moving at right angle direction towards observer who is also moving at right angle direction. B) If the radio source is moving in a transverse direction to the line01 sight from observer. C) If the radio source is moving from the line of sight from the observer, D) When the radio source and observer are moving away fro m each other. E) There is no way to estimate the Knot's speed of outward travel. 3. Which one could be the possible explanation for the illusion tha t knots appear to be moving faster than lig11t? A) It is because knots are mass of concentrated energy blowing out rings, B) Due to the gravitational law, the distance between object and source appears enhanced. C) This happens because of vacuum in the space. D) Because there is no material particle at that point. E) None of the above 4. Superluminal motion best be compared with A) mirage B) speed of light C) motion of a particle D) all the above E) none of the above 5. Which of the following is not true according to the theory of relativity? A) The dynan1ical properties of particle do not change. B) The mass of a particle increases to infinity as the speed approaches that of light. C) The mass of a particle increases as it is made to move faster and faster, D) The greater the inertia the greater the force needed to increase the speed of particle.

E) Radio waves can be made to move faster than that of light. 6. What could happen if crossing of the light speed barrier is made possible? A) Nature's orderly system could be disrupted. B) By travelling faster than light you could travel back into past. C) You could render your existence paradoxical by killing your grandfather before he had any children. D) All the above E) None of the above 7. According to the theory proposed by Deshpande, Sundarshan and Bilaniuk, which one of the following is not true? A) Particles move faster than light exist. B) They are consistent with the theory of relativity. C) They can travel into the past. D) They can't be used to send information and energy into the past E) They exist in nature because they can keep their speed slower down than that of light. 8. Superluminal motion is A) An experimentally proved truth. B) an illusion C) based on the theory of relativity D) Only A + C E) None of the above 19. What is 'tachyons'? A) These are particles, they can travel faster than light'. B) These are sub-atomic particles. C) These are particles; they can travel into past and move slower than the light speed. D) This is name of 'mirage'. E) None of the above 10. According to author, which of the following questions are arising out of the theory of 'breaking the light speed barrier'? A) Is it going to mark the end the theory of relativity? B) Will this make it possible for us to travel into past and future? C) Will effect precede the cause? D) All the above E) None of the above

PASSAGE-2
No wonder corporations are suffering from the last-mile gasp. Between the points of production and purchase, processes have become even more mechanical. Indeed, things have changed at the retail end. Global brands have debuted in droves; retail finance schemes court customers across glitzy counters; and dealers are moving lockstep to resolve the last-mile problem customer satisfaction. But as the tribe of customers has swelled, so have. aspiration levels. And the last mile has only got longer and longer. While most of a corporation's value activities are undergoing dramatic changes, in sync with global practices, customer satisfaction has yet to attain global class. Leading-edge firms link all their activities - be it product innova tion, manufacturing, marketing, and human resources - to the customer. She consciously, and subconsciously, influences every organisational decision. And the most effective employee appraisal process is one that is linked directly to customer satisfaction. The customer is not only the queen; she's the judge as well. An organisation is largely an aggregation of ideators, implementators, and coordinators.Thinkers, or ideators, often populate the top rungs. Rarely do they interface with the customer to map her mind. Satisfaction hardly remains on their radar screen. As long as sales rise, the customer is presumed to be happy. But is she, really? A technology-starved customer would only be thrilled to be presented with change new products. But such change often implies transplanting successful global models on Indian soil. Despite the promise of globalisation, localisation of global strategy, most labels fulfil a want, not an aspiration.

Globalisation helps corps to attain economies of scale, providing them cost advantage; it is rarely employed to achieve economies of desire, cost-effective customer delight. When globocorps acquire sales forces or beef them up in local markets, they do increase market penetration. But unless change sweeps sales forces as well turning foot soldiers into knowledge workers, corporations will not be able to create differentiation. Every interface with the customer must be a knowledge transaction; what is satisfaction to a corporation. The happier the customer the wiser the corporation. Unfortunately, sales and after-sales desperately need the kind of revolution that is sweeping some of India's shop floors, where ideas grease the wheels of innovation and flexibility fosters team spirit. Marketing gurus Michael Treacy and Fred Wiersema believe that organisations that create the cult of the customer grab the future: "First, customer value is the ultimate measure of one's work performance. Second, improving value (and the pace at which it is done) is the measure of one's success. Once absorbed into the fabric of a company, this credo assures that all employees engage their heads, their hands, and ...their hearts in going the extra distance for the customer." Just' as strtaegy yanks a corporation out of strategic somnolence and provokes it to differentiate, delight takes a corporation from the levels of satisfaction to customer excitement and customer bliss. Put simply, delighl is a spontaneous reaction to a customer response; it exceeds customer expectations . But delight is a mechanism to prepare the organisation for dealng with a living entity whose preferences are constantly changing: the customer Only by linking its value- activitist to satisfaction, rewarding employees on the basis of feedback, and empowering salesmen, can organizations learn to institutionalize delight. For delight is merely a springboard to jump from one level (customer satisfaction) to another (customer excitement).To create it organizations must learn to customize their offerings. By individualizing their brands, sellers can take satisfaction levels to excitement. The Net, which has already created a real time lean demand and supply chain, is making a beginning through mass customisation: individualisation for a group of buyers. In linear fashion, satisfaction leads to excitement, which, in turn morphs into bliss. All a corp needs is a dash of delight, a catalyst that can create the process for all this to happen; Customer bliss is not easy to achieve; it entails figuring out the customer's dormant desire and zapping her with a product that she could only have dreamt about. Very few firms have been able to achieve that. Sony's Walkman was born in the mind of the manufacturer it wasn't a reaction to market feedback; it was an uncanny understanding of the customer by an innovator 11. According to author, corporations are suffering from last mile-gasp, that is A) The gap between production and purchase B) The abundance of global brands C) The customer satisfaction D) About market share E) None of the above

12. According to author, the battle waged in corporate board-rooms and market trenches is for A) Desire over volume B) Volume over volume C) Numbers over emotions D) Sales over satisfactions E) None of the above 13. Which factor does influence every organisational decisions? A) Market share B) Quality of prod net C) Cost effectiveness and volume D) Customer E) None of the above

14. What is the scale used by an organisation for measuring the customer satisfaction? A) Rise in sale B) Increase in profit C) Increase in production D) A +B E) All the above 15. According to author, the techno-starved customer would aspire for A) Change B) quality product C) cost effectiveness D) Digital products E) none of the above 16. How will a global corporation be able to create differentiation in its sales force? A) By introducing global brands B) By increasing market penetration C) By knowledge transaction with customer D) Only B + C E) All the above 17. According to author, which is the highest level of customer satisfaction? A) Customer desire B) Customer delight C) Customer excitement D) Customer bliss E) none of the above 18. According to author, what is the mantra for bringing about the change in the functioning of an organisation? A) Change in value activities B) Knowledge transaction with customer C) Innovation and flexibility D) Cost effectiveness E) All the above 19. The catalyst to all happenings in an organisation is 'delight', that can be institutionIised by A) By linking all its value activities to satisfaction B) Rewarding employees on their performance C) Empowering salesman D) Only A + B E) All the above 20. According to author, what was unique about Sonys walkman? A) it, figured out customer's dormant desire and realised it with a product walkman B) It was an outcome ofl1'UlXketfeed back C) It achieved customer's bliss D) Only A +C E) All the above

PASSAGE -3
'What are the specific genes that make humans different from other great apes? When and how did humans develop language? Why are women's brains wired up to handle language better than men's? These are some of the really big puzzles of human evolution, and answering even one of them would be a triumph. However, an Oxford researcher has a theory that answers all three -and new genetic research has provided striking support for his claim.ProfTimCrow has proposed that there was a gene that emerged relatively late in human evolution and changed the way the brain developed, making one side dominant and so giving us the ability to produce language. What's more, he argued, this gene would behave slightly differently in men and women. That may sound like an impossibly complex job for a single gene, but another research group has announced that it has found a gene that appears to be capable of doing all these things. "The gene we've found is particularly interesting because it is one of the very few that is present in humans but not in apes," says Dr Nabeel Affara of the department of pathology at Cambridge University. "What this means is that it is a good candidate for a gene that is involved in a uniquely human ability, such as language."

What is particularly unusual about this gene in the makeup of the great apes is that it used to live on the X chromosome - the female sex chromo some, two copies of which are found in every female and one in every male. But, in the human male, a copy has jumped over to the Y chromosome, the one found only in men. . "Apes don't have a copy of this gene on their Y chromosome," Affata says,"which means that the move must have come after humans. split off from apes." On the basis of the latest molecular dating techniques, Dr Chris Tyler Smith of the department of biochemistry at Oxford University estimates that the jump could have happened about 3m years ago. This was the time when the size of the human brain was beginning to increase and tool usage was starting a to appear. He admits, though, that there is a wide margin of error. "Genetic dating is far from a precise science. It could easily be a mil-lion years either way. However, as circumstantial evidence it certainly fits in well with Crow's theory - and there's more. The fact that this gene known as PCDX, is found on the Y chromosome makes it likely that it is doing something important. That's because the Y chromosome is the wild frontier of the genome. Genes that arrive here have nowhere else to go, and the death rate is high. Unlike all the other chromosomes, the X and Y don't normally exchange genes, so once a gene arrives on Y via a rare freak event, ther e it stays. When it mutates, there are no healthy versions available to replace it. Most of the other genes here that we know about are involved in controlling masculinity and fertility, and they stay stable because damaging mutations do not reproduce. That PCDX has endured for millions of years means it is important, though it has not remained unchanged for all that time - and that introduces a further twist to this extraordinary tale. The block of genetic material that had, come over from the X chromo-some later split in half and reversed its position. According to Crow this most probably happened between 120,000 and 2000,000 years ago. If he is right that links PCDX to another crucial period of human evolution when big changes in tool-making and signs of symbolic ability began to emerge in Africa, Jeading to the appearance of modern humans. Tyler-Smith is more cautious, however. "We have no idea what effect this second shift had on the way PCDX worked;" he says. "It's quite possible that it had none at all." Hes also wary of dating events so specifically, "It must have happened after the first move and before the appearance of the modem Y chromosome, about 100,000 years ago." Circumstantial evidence is all very well, but what does the gene actually do? There more questions than answers, but nothing that has been found so far rules out the possibility that this is the gene or probably 0Jre of several, involved in language. "It is one of a family of genes known as cadhedrins'" Affara says, "These genes make proteins that live on the surface of nerve cells and are involved in signalling. PCDX is active in the foetus and it is only turned on in certain regions or the brain." Once again, these are all features you would expect to find in a language gene. Still more impressive is finding that PCDX behaves differently in men and women, just as Crow suggested. Although PCDX originated on the female X chromosome, it is now slightly altered and it seems to have different effects. For instance, retinoic acid is an important molecule found allover the body: it turns genes on and off; Affara has found that while the version of PCDX on the X chromosome responds to retinoic acid, the Y version does not. "What that suggests is that the male and female versions are regulated indifferent ways," Affara says, and there is a possible mechanism for a sex difference. But PCDX was certainly not the only factor that allowed us to speak, but what is so new and exciting about this gene is that, for the first time, there is a clear theory about one of the elements of language that can be tested. 21. The theory of Tim Crow about the development of human speech a question relating to human evolution, has claimed answer to all of the following questions except A) What are the specific genes that make human different from other great apes? B) When and how did human developed their language? C) Why women's brain function better than that of men's?

D) Why are women's brain better wired up to handle language better than men's? E) A and B 22. The research of Prof. Tim Crow has provided all the following facts except A) There was a gene that emerged relatively late in. human evolution B) It changed the way brain developed, making one side dominant and so gave us the ability to produce language. C) It behaved slightly different in men and women. D) It is not the job of a single gene but many more are involved in this process. E) B and C 23. Why is the find of language gene compared only with apes? A) Because apes are like humans. B) Apes have all the traits of humans. C) The evolution of humans is from apes. D) Apes have same genetic structure as humans. E) Because apes are as intelligent as humans. 24. PCDX is A) a term used to signify the split of human from apes. B) A language gene. C) A gene instrumental in synthesis of retionic acid D) all of the above E) None of the above 25. According to Nabed Affara, Apes did not develop speech ability because A) This language gene is not found in apes. B) Sex determining chromosomes are not distinct in apes. C) Language gene is not formed on Y chromosomes in apes. D) The number of X chromosomes are not same as found in human. E) None of the above 26. According to Nabed Affara, the unique characteristics of this language gene are many. Which of the following characteristics is/are true? A) In the make up of great apes, this gene used to live on femaleX chromosomes. B) But in human male, a copy of the language gene has crossed over to 'V' chromosomes. C) Apes do not have the copy of this gene on their Y chromosomes. D) All the above E) None of the above 27. The jump of language gene over 'V' chromosomes would have happened 3m years ago, according to A) Prof Tim crow B) Dr. Nabod Affara C) Dr. Chris Tyler D) All of the above E) None of the above 28. Which of the following is/are true about language gene? A) It is one from a family of genes known as 'cadhedrins'. B) These genes make proteins that live on the surface of nerve cells and are involved in signalling. C) The language gene is active in foetus and is only turned on in certain regions of the brain. D) All the above E) None of the above

29. The circumstantial evidences that give credence to this theory are A) The finding of PCDX on Y chromosomes makes it likely that it is doing something important. B) Genes that arrive on 'V' have no where else to go, so the deat h rate is high. C) X and Y chromosomes do not normally exchange genes lik e other chromosomes. So once a gene arrives on Y, it stays there~ D) They stay there, because damaging mutation do not reproduce. The way PCDX endures for millions of years. E) All the above 30. The conclusions that can be drawn from the passage are all of the following except A) Finding of PCDX has finally solved the riddle of speech development in humans. B) The PCDX was not the only factor that allowed us to speak. C) But finding of this PCDX gene has provided a theory for the first time about one of the elements of languages responsible for speech development. D) This theory is yet to be established. E) C and D

PASSAGE -4
GM Crops -the term carries such opprobrium that your daily roti turns to ash even as you say it. The vocabulary of genetically modified agriculture and biopharming -grows more menacing with each news snippet. Terminator seeds, killer technology, what's next? The picture of a genetically modified crop resembles the worst excesses of Stephen king, acres of greenery rippling in the breeze, slowly advancing to engulf civilization. Genetically modified agriculture, the media will have you believe, is all about enslavement to multinational seed companies, death to the small fanner. Is that true? The potato plant in the testube is growing an edible vaccine in its tuber. Its an example of biopharming, the new technology that coaxes the plant into producing a drug or a vaccine. Most of the doubts that have been whispered about biopharmin g Researchers are working on growing biological proteins like urokinase (that dissolves blood clots) and haemoglobin (the oxygen carrier) in tobaco. Biopharming for human proteins needed in life threatening conditions has enormous potential. For one thing, it would be far cheaper than the current practice of producing these drugs in genetically modified mammalian cells grown in vats. But fears abound. The principal dread is contamination. What if crosspollination carries these traits into neighbouring fields of ordinary crop? That could mean wild strains being wiped out a genetic disaster. Waif insects fall dead on feeding off the plant, or the drug leaches into the soil? These are real fears, as yet not completely countered by the regulations on biopharming. Already, about 20 companies worldwide are working on producing pharmaceuticals plants. Some of these drugs are already being tested in human clinical trials, including vaccines for hepatitis B and an antibody to prevent tooth decay. The total drug output from a small crop can be very high, but hen, so is the demand. 45,000 acres of genetically modified tobacco would have to be biopharmed to meet the entire world wide demand for human serum albumin have already been vociferously published with regard to food crops. The spillover from GM food crop protests is certainly slowing progress on biopharming. Scientists working on genetically modified food crops are now actively ad-dressing these fears by exploring new technologies. Apomixis is the name of the wonder technology that's being eagerly pursued by food scientists all over the world. Oddly enough, Nature has had it going for millennia in many plants from the lowly grass, to fruit like citrus. But now when science tries to trap Nature into doing the same on different plant species, it grows curiously coy. Most of us know apomixis by another name: cloning. It's form of asexual reproduction in which the maternal genome is carried unchanged into the next generation. The male contribution is essentially a dud. All that it does is to set the process of reproduction in motion. The world's major food grains: rice, wheat, millet, don't take kindly to apomixis in Nature. But what if they could be induced to do so?

The crop, the farmer, the consumer: together, all three sustain the ecology. Any change in technology will have to consider all three. Earlier forms of genetically modified agriculture came under fire because they considered only the crop. Here's what scientists expect of apomixis: It will simplify crop breeding. A high yielding com, wheat or rice plant could reproduce itself unchanged for generations through apomixis. It will make it easier to develop high-yield hybrids. Seeds will be cheaper, can be saved and planted the next year without loss of yield. Besides, the amount of seed a farmer needs to buy will be smaller: with apomixis, a crop xeroxes itself.Apomixis is being read as a challenge to the Terminator technology of large seed companies. So far, conventional methods have been tried to make apomictic crops. Millet, for instance, has been cross-bred with wild relatives that are naturally apomictic.But this has been slow, and not very successful: after several generations, seed production is still too low for commercial use. Such methods work on the premise that apomixis is controlled by a single gene or a group of genes. But what if many more factors are operative? What if several chromosomes contribute controlling genes? Some scientists are trying out cross-breeding plant types with different developmental times. The zoological parallel would be mating animals with different gestation periods. Such forced micegenation, scientists feel, may scramble genetic instructions badly enough to force the plant to resort to apomixis. The theory is not so fanciful as Darwinian. Paleobotanists feel that during the Ice Age, when plants from widely different geographical locations were brought together, apomicts kept species going. Gene mapping and gene sequencing should soon tell biologists how apomixis comes about. And when it does, watch out! That helping of break-fast cereal, the xerox on your plate, might just be evolution in the making. 31. The term biopharming means A) Gene mapping and gene sequencing in plants B) To scramble genetic instruction to force the plants to produce much more than usual. C) To wheedal a plant into producing medicinal drug or vaccine. D) All the above E) None of the above 32. The new technology biopharming is useful for mankind in many ways. Which of the following is/are true about biopharming? A) This is being used in producing drugs and vaccines. B) Through biopharming, vaccine for hepatitis B and an antibody to prevent tooth decay has already been developed. C) There are efforts for growing biological proteins like urokinase and haemoglobin in tobacco D) through the methods of biopharming, human proteins needed in life threatening conditions has enormous potential, for it would be far cheaper than the current practice of producing in genetically modified mammalian cells grown in vats. 33. Urokinase is A) A vaccine for hepatities B B) An antibody to prevent tooth decay C) A biological protein that dissolves blood clots D) A term used for terminator seeds E) None of the above 34. Genetically modified tobacco is biopharmed for A) Human serum albumin B) urokinase C) haemoglobin D) all of the above E) None of the above

35. The risk involved in biophaming is A) Of contamination that could result is genetic disorder. B) Messing up of genetic instructions of plants being produced through biofarming. C) Of soil becoming infertile or drug infected. D) That it will enslave whole civilization and in particular death to small farmers. E) all of the above 36. Micegenation is A) Mating plant types with different gestation periods B) Cross breeding of one plant seeds with other plant seeds. C) Mapping of genes and their sequencing for apomixis D) all of the above E) None of above 37. Which one of the following is not true about Apomixis? A) Another name of apomixis is cloning B) It is a form of asexual reproduction in which material genome is carried unchanged into the next generation. C) In nature, apomixis has been taking place for thousands of years. D) Scientifically, now it has been grown more easily and in abundance. E) None of the above 38. The apomixis technology is preferred over genetically modified (GM) agriculture because A) Apomixis considers the crop, the fanner and the consumer all three for sustaining ecology while GM agriculture considers only crop. B) Apomixis will simplify crop breeding and could reproduce unchanged for generations while in genetically modified agriculture crop breeding is complex and can be used only once. C) Apomixis will make it easier to develop high yielding hybrids, seeds will be cheaper and can be saved and planted next year without loss in yields while GM seeds are pretty costly and can't be saved for next year's use. D) All the above E) None of the above 39. The conventional method to make up apomictic crops by cross breeding with apomictic wild relatives is based on the logic that A) Mating of different genes with X and Y chromosomes acts in the process of apomixis. B) Other than genes, many more factors control the process of apomixis. C) Apomixis is controlled by a single gene or a group of genes which are compatible. D) all of the above E) None of the above 40. Why are scientists adopting forced micegenation in biopharming? A) To map the genes. B) To make plants apomictic. C) To produce mutations in plants or animals. D) To produce animal protein E) For all of the above reasons