On the basis of the above passage, the following assumptions have been made:
- 1.The issue of effects of natural calamities on agriculture is not given due consideration by GM technology companies.
- 2.In the long run, GM technology will not be able to solve agricultural problems arising due to global warming.
Which of the above assumptions is/are valid?
Answer & explanation
Answer: (a) 1 only
Companies invest in herbicide and pest resistance for quick profits, while resistance to drought, salinity and other stresses — the effects of natural calamities — is what the Commission says must come first. So those effects are not getting due attention. The passage never says GM cannot solve such problems; it wants GM aimed at them.
- ✓ 1. Priority 'must be given' to drought and salinity resistance, which corporations, chasing short-run profit, are not pursuing.
- ✗ 2. The passage says genes 'can help impart resistance to drought, salinity and other stresses'; it does not predict GM's long-run failure.
Remember · Don't confuse 'the technology is misdirected' with 'the technology cannot work'; the passage criticises priorities, not potential.
Question and answer: UPSC's official GS Paper II (2019, Series A) — paper ↗ · answer key ↗. Explanation: Minimalist IAS, checked 30 Sept 2026 (how we verify). ·