Which of the following statements in respect of the fungus cannot be derived from the text?
Result:
AI explanationShows the answer. Tap to open.
Option 1: "Fungus cleans up the planet for us."
Explanation: The text discusses how fungus contributes to the process of decay and rot, which is essential for recycling nutrients in the ecosystem. However, it does not explicitly state that fungus 'cleans up the planet for us.' This statement implies a direct benefit to humans, which is not mentioned in the text.
Option 2: "Fungus is a non-parasitic plant."
Explanation: The text describes fungus as a plant that does not possess chlorophyll and relies on other plants for energy. It does not classify fungus as parasitic, indicating that it is non-parasitic in nature. Therefore, this statement can be derived from the text.
Option 3: "Mould is a representation of fungus."
Explanation: The text explicitly mentions that mould is a visible form of fungus, particularly when it is seen on bread or other organic matter. This statement is directly supported by the text.
Option 4: "Fungus cannot eat some types of dead matter."
Explanation: The text implies that fungus can decompose various types of dead matter, as it is described as the major source of rot and decay. Therefore, this statement contradicts the information provided in the text.
Option 5: "Fungus does not eat plants from centuries past."
Explanation: The text states that without fungus action, the earth would be piled high with dead plant life from past centuries, indicating that fungus does indeed consume such matter. Thus, this statement is incorrect.
The rest of this explanation is for members. Sign in free to read why the other options are wrong, key words and tips.
Sign in to read the full explanation