IELTS ACADEMIC READING 3

Human Interference and Finches

Today, the quest continues. On Daphne Major —one of the most desolate of the Galápagos Islands, an uninhabited volcanic cone where cacti and shrubs seldom grow higher than a researcher’s knee Peter and Rosemary Grant have spent more than three decades watching Darwin’s finches respond to the challenges of storms, drought and competition for food. Biologists at Princeton University, the Grants know and recognize many of the individual birds on the island and can trace the birds’ lineages back through time. They have witnessed Darwin’s principle in action again and again, over many generations of finches.

The Grants’ most dramatic insights have come from watching the evolving bill of the medium ground finch. The plumage of this sparrow-sized bird ranges from dull brown to jet black. At first glance, it may not seem particularly striking, but among scientists who study evolutionary biology, the medium ground finch is a superstar. Its bill is a middling example in the array of shapes and sizes found among Galapagos finches: heftier than that of the small ground finch, which specializes in eating small, soft seeds, but petite compared to that of the large ground finch, an expert at cracking and devouring big, hard seeds.

When the Grants began their study in the 1970s, only two species of finch lived on Daphne Major, the medium ground finch and the cactus finch. The island is so small that the researchers were able to count and catalogue every bird. When a severe drought hit in 1977, the birds soon devoured the last of the small, easily eaten seeds. Smaller members of the medium ground finch population, lacking the bill strength to crack large seeds, died out.

Bill and body size are inherited traits, and the next generation had a high proportion of big-billed Individuals. The Grants had documented natural selection at work the same process that over many millennia, directed the evolution of the Galápagos’ 14 unique finch species, all descended from a common ancestor that readied the islands a few million years ago.

Eight years later, heavy rains brought by an El Nino transformed the normally meager vegetation on Daphne Major. Vines and other plants that in most years struggle for survival suddenly flourished, choking out the plants that provide large seeds to the finches. Small seeds came to dominate the food supply, and big birds with big bills died out at a higher rate than smaller ones. ‘Natural selection is observable/ Rosemary Grant says. ‘It happens when the environment changes. When local conditions reverse themselves, so does the direction of adaptation.’

Recently, die Grants witnessed another form of natural selection acting on the medium ground finch: competition from bigger, stronger cousins. In 1982, a third finch, the large ground finch, came to live on Daphne Major. The stout bills of these birds resemble the business end of a crescent wrench. Their arrival was the first such colonization recorded on the Galapagos in nearly a century of scientific observation. ‘We realized,’ Peter Grant says, ‘we had a very unusual and potentially important event to follow’. For 20 years, the large ground finch coexisted with the medium ground finch, which shared five supply of large seeds with its bigger-billed relative. Then, in 2002 and 2003, another drought struck. None of the birds nested that year, and many died out. Medium ground finches with large bills, crowded out of feeding areas by the more powerful large ground finches, were hit particularly hard.

When wetter weather returned in 2004, and the finches nested again, the new generation of the medium ground finch was dominated by smaller birds with smaller bills, able to survive on smaller seeds. This situation, says Peter Grant, marked the first time that biologists have been able to follow the complete process of an evolutionary change due to competition between, species and the strongest response to natural selection that he had seen in 33 years of tracking Galapagos finches.

On the inhabited island of Santa Cruz, just south of Daphne Major, Andrew Hendry of McGill University and Jeffrey Podos of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst have discovered a new, man-made twist in finch evolution. Their study focused on birds living near the Academy Bay research station, on the fringe of the town of Puerto Ayora. The human population of the area has been growing fast—from 900 people in 1974 to 9,582 In 2001. Today Puerto Ayorn is full of hotels and maitai bars,’ Hendry says. ‘People have taken this extremely arid place and tried to turn it Into a Caribbean resort.

Academy Bay records dating back to the early 1960s show that medium ground finches captured there had either small or large bills. Very few of the birds had mid-size bills. The finches appeared to be in the early stages of a new adaptive radiation: If the trend continued, the medium ground finch on Santa Cruz could split into two distinct subspecies, specializing in different types of seeds. But in the late 1960s and early 70s, medium ground finches with medium-sized bills began to thrive at Academy Bay along with small and largebilled birds. The booming human population had introduced new food sources, including exotic plants and bird feeding stations stocked with rice. Billsize, once critical to the finches’ survival, no longer made any difference. ‘Now an intermediate bill can do fine/ Hendry says.

At a control site distant from Puerto Ayora, and relatively untouched by humane, the medium ground finch population remains split between large- and small-billed birds. On undisturbed parts of Santa Cruz, there Is no ecological niche for a middling medium ground finch, and the birds continue to diversify. In town, though there are still many finches, once-distinct populations are merging.

The finches of Santa Cruz demonstrate a subtle process in which human meddling can stop evolution In Its tracks, outing the formation of new species. In a time when global biodiversity continues Its downhill slide, Darwin’s finches have yet another unexpected lesson to teach. ‘If we hope to regain some of the diversity that’s already been lost/ Hendry says, ‘we need to protect not just existing creatures, but also the processes that drive the origin of new species.’

Questions 1-4

Complete the table below.

Year	Climate	Finch’s condition
1977	1………….	small-beak birds failing to survive without the power to open 2………….
1985	3………. brought by El Nino	big-beak birds dying out with 4……… as the main food resource

Questions 5-8

Complete the following summary of the paragraphs of Reading Passage 1, using NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS from the Reading Passage for each answer. Write your answers in boxes 5-8 on your answer sheet

On the remote island of Santa Cruz, Andrew Hendry and Jeffrey Podos conducted a study on reversal in 5………….due to human activity. In the early 1960s medium ground finches were found to have a larger or smaller beak. But in the late 1960b and early 70s, finches with 6………….flourished. The study speculates that it is due to the growing 7……………who brought in alien plants along with 8……… into the area.

Questions 9-13

Do die following statements agree with the information given in Reading Passage 1?

In boxes 9-13 on your answer sheet, write

TRUE if the statement is true

FALSE if the statement is false

NOT GIVEN if the information is not given in the passage

Grants’ discovery has questioned Darwin’s theory.
The cactus finches are less affected by food than the medium ground finch.
In 2002 and 2003, all the birds were affected by the drought.
The discovery of Andrew Hendry and Jeffrey Podos was the same as that of the previous studies.
It is shown that the revolution in finches on Santa Cruz is likely a response to human intervention.

PASSAGE 2

Electronic Equipment and Flights

Mobiles are barred, but passenger can tap away on their laptops to their heart’ content. Is one realty safer than the other? hi the US, a Congressional subcommittee frilled airline representatives and regulators about the issue test month. But the committee heard that using cellphones in planes may indeed pose a risk, albeit a slight one. This would seem to vindicate the treatment of Manchester oil worker Neil Whitehouse, who was sentenced last summer to a year in jail by a British court for refusing to turn off his mobile phone on a flight home from Madrid. Although he was only typing a message to be sent on landing, not actually making a call, the court decided that he was putting the flight at risk.

The potential fin problems are certainly there. Modern airliners are packed with electronic devices that control the plane and handle navigation and communications. Each has to meet stringent safeguards to make sure it doesn’t emit radiation that would interfere with other devices in the plane, standards that passengers’ personal electronic devices don’t necessarily meet. Emissions from inside the plane could also interfere with sensitive antennae on the fixed exterior.

But despite running a numbs of studies, Boeing, Airbus and various government agencies haven’t been able to find clear evidence of problems caused by personal electronic devices, including mobile phones. “We’ve done our own studies. We’ve found cellphones actually have no impact on the navigation system,” Bays Maryazme Greczyn, a spokeswoman for Airbus Industries of North America in Herndon, Virginia, nor do they affect other critical systems, she says. The only impact Airbus found – “Sometimes when a passenger is starting or finishing a phone call, the pilot hears a very slight beep in the headset,” she says.

The best evidence yet of a problem comes from a report released this year by Britain’s Civil Aviation Authority. Its researchers generated simulated cellphone transmissions inside two Boeing aircraft They concluded that the transmissions could create signals at a power and frequency that would not affect the latest equipment but exceeded the safety threshold established in 1984 and might therefore affect some of the older equipment on board. This doesn’t mean “mission critical” equipment such as the navigation system and flight controls. But the devices that could be affected, such as smoke detectors and fuel level indicators, could still create serious problems for the flight crew if they malfunction.

Many planes still use equipment certified to the older standards, says Dan Hawkes, head of avionics at the CAA’s Safety Regulation Group. The CAA study doesn’t prove the equipment will actually fell when cellphone signals actually cause devices to fail.

In 1996, RTCA, a consultant hired by the Federal Aviation Administration in the US to conduct tests, determined that potential problems from personal electronic devices were ‘’low”. Nevertheless, it recommended a ban on their use during “critical” periods of flight, such as takeoff and landing. RTCA didn’t actually test cellphones, but nevertheless recommended their wholesale ban on flights. But if “better safe than sorry” is the current policy, it’s applied inconsistently, according to Marshall Cross, the chairman of MegaWave Corporation, based in Boylston, Massachusetts. Why are cellphones outlawed when no one considers a ban on laptops? “It’s like most things in life. The reason is a little bit technical, a little bit economic and a little bit political,” says Cross.

The company wrote a report for the FAA in 1998 saying it is possible to build an on-board system that can detect dangerous signals from electronic devices. But Cross’s personal conclusion is that mobile phones aren’t the real threat “You’d have to stretch things pretty far to figure out how a cellphone could interfere with a plane’s systems,” he says. Cellphones transmit in ranges of around 400, 800 or 1800 megahertz. Since no important piece of aircraft equipment operates at those frequencies, the possibility of interference is very low. Cross says. The use of computers and electronic game systems is much more worrying, he says. They can generate very strong signals at frequencies that could interfere with plane electronics, especially ư a mouse is attached (the wire operates as an antenna or if their built-in shielding is somehow damaged. Some airlines are even planning to put sockets for laptops in seatbacks.

There’s fairly convincing anecdotal evidence that some personal electronic devices have interfered with systems. Air crew on one flight found that the autopilot was being disconnected, and narrowed the problem down to a passenger’s portable computer. They could actually watch the autopilot disconnect when they switched the computer on. Boeing bought the computer, took it to the airline’s labs and even tested it on an empty flight. But as with every other reported instance of interference, technicians were unable to replicate the problem.

Some engineers, however, such as Bruce Donham of Boeing, say that common sense suggests phones are more risky than laptops. “A device capable of producing a strong emission is not as safe as a device which does not have any intentional emission,” he says. Nevertheless, many experts think it’s illogical that cellphones are prohibited when computers aren’t. Besides, the problem is more complicated than simply looking at power and frequency. In the air, the plane operates in a soup of electronic emissions, created by its own electronics and by ground-based radiation. Electronic devices in the cabin-especially those emitting a strong signal like a radio, can behave unpredictably, reinforcing other signals, for instance, or creating unforeseen harmonics that disrupt systems.

Despite the Congressional subcommittee hearings last month, no one seems to be working seriously on a technical solution that would allow passengers to use their phones. That’s mostly because no one -besides cellphone users themselves stand to gain a lot if the phones are allowed in the air. Even the cellphone companies don’t want it. They are concerned that airborne signals could cause problems by flooding a number of the networks’ base stations at once with the same signal This effect, called big footing, happens because airborne cellphone signals tend to go to many base stations at once, unlike land calls which usually go to just one or two stations. In the US, even if FAA regulations didn’t prohibit cellphones in the air, Federal Communications Commission regulations would.

Possible solutions might be to enhance airliners’ electronic insulation, or to fit detectors which warned flight staff when passenger devices were emitting dangerous signals. But Cross complains that neither the FAA, the airlines nor the manufacturers are showing much interest in developing these. So, despite Congressional suspicions and the occasional irritated (or jailed) mobile user, the industry’s “better safe than sorry” policy on mobile phones seems likely to continue. In the absence of firm evidence that the international airline industry is engaged in a vast conspiracy to overcharge its customers, a delayed phone call seems a small price to pay for even the tiniest reduction in the chances of a plane crash. But you’ll still be allowed to use your personal computer during a flight. And while that remains the case, airlines can hardly claim that logic has prevailed.

Questions 14 – 17

Complete the following summary of the paragraphs of Reading Passage, using no more than three words from the Reading Passage for each answer. Write your answers in boxes 14-17 on your answer sheet.

The would-be risk surly exists, since the avionic systems on modern aircraft are used to manage flight and deal with 14)…………. Those devices are designed to meet the safety criteria which should be free from interrupting 15)………… The personal use of mobile phone may cause the sophisticated 16)………….outside of plane to dysfunction. Though definite interference in piloting devices has not been scientifically testified, the devices such as those which detect .17)…………..in cabinet could be affected.

Question 18 -22

Use the information in the passage to match the Organization (listed A-E) with opinions or deeds below. Write the appropriate letters A-E in boxes 18-22 on your answer sheet.

British Civil Aviation Authority
Maryanne Greczyn
RTCA
Marshall Cross
Boeing company

A.) Mobile usages should be forbidden in a specific time.

B.) Computers are more dangerous than cell phones.

C.) finding that tile mobile phones pose little risk on flight’ navigation devices.

D.) The disruption of laptops is not as dangerous as cellphones.

E.) The mobile signal may have impact on earlier devices.

Questions 23-26

Do the following statements agree with the information given in Reading Paasage2 In boxes 23-26 on your answer sheet, write

TRUE if the statement is true

FALSE If the statement is false

NOT GIVEN If the information not given in the passage

Almost all scientists accept that cellphones have higher emission than that of personal computers.
Some people believe that radio emission win interrupt the equipment on plane.
The signal interference-detecting device has not yet been developed because they are in priority far neither administrative department nor offer economic incentive.
FAA initiated open debate with Federal Communications Commission.

PASSAGE 3

Questions 27-34

Reading Passage 3 has eight sections A-H. Choose the correct heading for each section from the list of headings below. Write the correct number I-X in boxes 27-34 on your answer sheet.

List of Headings

i.) Different personality types mentioned

ii.) recommendation of combined styles for group

iii.) Historical explanation of understanding personality

iv.) A lively and positive attitude person depicted

v.) A personality likes challenge and direct communication

vi.) different characters illustrated

vii.) Functions of understanding communication styles

viii.) Cautious and considerable person cited

ix.) Calm and Factual personality illustrated

x.) Self-assessment determines one’s temperament

Section A
Section B
Section C
Section D
Section E
Section F
Section G
Section H

RESOLVING CONFLICT THROUGH COMMUNICATION

Section A

As far back as Hippocrates’ time (460-370 B.C.) people have tried to understand other people by characterizing them according to personality type or temperament. Hippocrates believed there were four different body fluids that influenced four basic types of temperament. His work was further developed 500 years later by Galem. These days there are any number of self-assessment tools that relate to the basic descriptions developed by Galen, although we no longer believe the source to be the types of body fluid that dominate our systems.

Section B

The values in self-assessments that help determine personality style, learning styles, communication styles, conflict-handling styles, or other aspects of individuals is that they help depersonalize conflict in interpersonal relationships. The depersonalization occurs when you realize that others aren’t trying to be difficult, but they need different or more information than you do. They’re not intending to be rude: they are so focused on the task they forget about greeting people. They would like to work faster but not at the risk of damaging the relationships needed to get the job done. They understand there is a job to do. But it can only be done right with the appropriate information, which takes time to collect When used appropriately, understanding communication styles can help resolve conflict on teams. Very rarely are conflicts true personality issues. Usually they are issues of style, information needs, or focus.

Section C

Hippocrates and later Galen determined there were four basic temperaments: sanguine, phlegmatic, melancholic and choleric. These descriptions were developed centuries ago and are still somewhat apt, although you could update the wording, in today’s world, they translate into the four fairly common communication styles described below:

Section D

The sanguine person would be the expressive or spirited style of communication. These people speak in pictures. They invest a lot of emotion and energy in their communication and often speak quickly. Putting their whole body into it. They are easily sidetracked onto a story that may or may not illustrate the point they are trying to make. Because of their enthusiasm, they are great team motivators. They are concerned about people and relationships. Their high levels of energy can come on strong at times and their focus is usually on the bigger picture, which means they sometimes miss the details or the proper order of things. These people find conflict or differences of opinion invigorating and love to engage in a spirited discussion. They love change and arc constantly looking for new and exciting adventures.

Section E

Tile phlegmatic person – cool and persevering – translates into the technical or systematic communication style. This style of communication is focused on facts and technical details. Phlegmatic people have an orderly, methodical way of approaching tasks, and their focus is very much on the task, not on the people, emotions, or concerns that the task may evoke. The focus is also more on the details necessary to accomplish a task.

Sometimes the details overwhelm the big picture and focus needs to be brought back to the context of the task. People with this style think the facts should speak for themselves, and they are not as comfortable with conflict. They need time to adapt to change and need to understand both the logic of it and the steps involved.

Section F

The melancholic person who is softhearted and oriented toward doing things for others translates into the considerate or sympathetic communication style. A person with this communication style is focused on people and relationships. They are good listeners and do things for other people sometimes to the detriment of getting things done for themselves. They want to solicit everyone’s opinion and make sure everyone is comfortable with whatever is required to get the job done. At times this focus on others can distract from the task at hand. Because they are so concerned with the needs of others and smoothing over issues, they do not like conflict. They believe that change threatens the status quo and tends to make people feel uneasy, so people with this communication style, like phlegmatic, people need time to consider the changes in order to adapt to them.

Section G

The choleric temperament translates into the bold or direct style of communication. People with this style are brief in their communication – the fewer words the better. They are big picture thinkers and love to be involved in many things at once. They are focused on tasks and outcomes and often forget that the people involved in carrying out the tasks have needs. They don’t do detail work easily and as a result can often underestimate how much time it takes to achieve the task. Because they are so direct, they often seem forceful and can be very intimidating to others. They usually would welcome someone challenging them. But most other styles are afraid to do so. They also thrive on change, the more the better.

Section H

A well-functioning team should have all of these communication styles for true effectiveness. All teams need to focus on the task, and they need to take care of relationships in order to achieve those tasks. They need the big picture perspective or the context of their work, and they need the details to be identified and taken care of for success. We all have aspects of each style within us. Some of us can easily move from one style to another and adapt our style to the needs of the situation at hand-whether the focus is on tasks or relationships. For others,

a dominant style is very evident, and it is more challenging to see the situation from the perspective of another style.

The work environment can influence communication styles either by the type of work that is required or by the predominance of one style reflected in that environment. Some people use one style at work and another at home. The good news about communication styles is that we ah have the ability to develop flexibility in our styles. The greater the flexibility we have, the more skilled we usually are at handling possible and actual conflicts. Usually it has to be relevant to US to do so, either because we think it is important or because there are incentives in our environment to encourage it. The key is that we have to want to become flexible with our communication style. As Henry Ford said, “Whether you think you can or you can’t, you’re right!”

Questions 35-39

Do the following statements agree with the information given in Reading Passage 3. In boxes 35-39 on your answer sheet, write

TRUE if the statement is true

FALSE if the statement is false

NOT GIVEN if the information is not given in the passage