Question

part b: the author wants to add additional reasoning to support their claim. which of these reasons would not support the answer to part a? choose 1 answer: lawns are much more attractive than natural wildflowers, so lawns increase a homes property value over time. in one study, neighborhoods that replaced their lawns with natural growth saw a measurable increase in the bee population. lawns produce little to no pollen, denying bees the opportunity to pollinate. because lawns use herbicides, they prevent varied species of flowers from growing where they naturally would.

Explanation:

To determine which reason does not support the answer to Part A (assuming Part A is about the benefits of natural growth over lawns for bees/ecology), we analyze each option:

• Option A: Talks about lawns increasing property value (attractiveness), which is unrelated to ecological/bee - related support for natural growth.
• Option B: Shows natural growth helps bees (increase in bee population), so it supports.
• Option C: Shows lawns harm bees (no pollen for pollination), so it supports.
• Option D: Shows lawns harm plant diversity (prevent natural flower growth), so it supports.

Answer:

A. Lawns are much more attractive than natural wildflowers, so lawns increase a home's property value over time.