Question

rican scientist. he studied dna, the material information.
shape of dna
uling was not interested in dna until 1952,
lrich miescher had discovered dna in 1869.
ew only a little. it came in long strands, and
sugar backbone. there were also nucleic
backbone like knobs on a spine. but the
ey linked up were mysteries—important
th hemoglobin, shape can affect how
of dna became the most important
s, assumed he was the only one smart
this wasnt, or at least wasnt only,
ever been beaten before. so in 1952,
alifornia to crack dna. he decided,
bases sat on the outside of each strand
oone toward the molecules core. pauling
ple helix, with three ribbons of the
ming a spiral. unfortunately for pauling,
this question has two parts. answer part a, and then answer part b.
part a
which claim does the author develop throughout the passage regarding linus pauling?

1. pauling lost the race to discover the shape of dna in part because he was overly confident.
2. pauling has been unjustly excluded from the praise given to scientists who researched dna.
3. pauling sometimes cheated in order to prevent other scientists from solving dna before he did.
4. pauling should have gotten credit for determining that dna strands were in the shape of a helix.

Explanation:

To solve this, we analyze each option:

• Option 1: The passage implies Pauling was overly confident (e.g., "assumed he was the only one smart enough", "had never been beaten before") and this led to him losing the race to discover DNA's shape (he made incorrect assumptions about DNA's structure).
• Option 2: The passage doesn't suggest he was unjustly excluded from praise.
• Option 3: There's no evidence of cheating in the passage.
• Option 4: The passage shows his helix model was incorrect (three - ribbon helix, wrong base positioning), so he shouldn't get credit for the correct helix shape.

Answer:

1. Pauling lost the race to discover the shape of DNA in part because he was overly confident.