Scientists have known since 1952 that DNA is the basic stuff of heredity.
They've known its chemical structure since 1953. They know that human DNA acts
like a biological computer program some 3 billion bits long that spells out the
instructions for making proteins， the basic building blocks of life.
But everything the genetic engineers have accomplished during the past
half-century is just a preamble to the work that Collins and Anderson and
legions of colleagues are doing now. Collins leads the Human Genome Project， a
15-year effort to draw the first detailed map of every nook and cranny and gene
in human DNA. Anderson， who pioneered the first successful human gene-therapy
operations， is leading the campaign to put information about DNA to use as
quickly as possible in the treatment and prevention of human diseases.
What they and other researchers are plotting is nothing less than a
biomedical revolution. Like Silicon Valley pirates reverse-engineering a
computer chip to steal a competitor's secrets， genetic engineers are decoding
life's molecular secrets and trying to use that knowledge to reverse the natural
course of disease. DNA in their hands has become both a blueprint and a drug， a
pharmacological substance of extraordinary potency that can treat not just
symptoms or the diseases that cause them but also the imperfections in DNA that
make people susceptible to a disease.
And that's just the beginning. For all the fevered work being done，
however， science is still far away from the Brave New World vision of
engineering a perfect human—or even a perfect tomato. Much more research is
needed before gene therapy becomes commonplace， and many diseases will take
decades to conquer， if they can be conquered at all.
In the short run， the most practical way to use the new technology will be
in genetic screening. Doctors will be able to detect all sorts of flaws in DNA
long before they can be fixed. In some cases the knowledge may lead to
treatments that delay the onset of the disease or soften its effects. Someone
with a genetic predisposition to heart disease， for example， could follow a
low-fat diet. And if scientists determine that a vital protein is missing
because the gene that was supposed to make it is defective， they might be able
to give the patient an artificial version of the protein. But in other
instances， almost nothing can be done to stop the ravages brought on by genetic
mutations. (409 words)
1. It can be inferred from the text that Collins and Anderson and legions
of colleagues _____.
[A] know that human DNA acts like a biological computer program
[B] have found the basic building blocks of life
[C] have accomplished some genetic discovery during the past
half-century
[D] are making a breakthrough in DNA
2. Collins and Anderson are cited in the text to indicate all the following
EXCEPT that ______.
[A] time-consuming effort is needed to accomplish the detailed map of in
human DNA
[B] human gene-therapy operations may be applied to the patients
[C] gene-therapy now is already generally used to the treatment and
prevention of human diseases
[D] information about DNA may be used in the treatment and prevention of
human diseases
3. The word “pirate” (line 2， paragraph 3) means______.
[A] one who robs at sea or plunders the land from the sea
[B] one who makes use of or reproduces the work of another without
authorization
[C] to take (something) by piracy
[D] to make use of or reproduce (another's work) without authorization
4. We can draw a conclusion from the text that_____.
[A] engineering a perfect human is not feasible for the time being
[B] it‘s impossible for scientists to engineer a perfect tomato
[C] many diseases will never be conquered by human beings
[D] doctors will be able to cure all sorts of flaws in DNA in the long
run
5. The best title for the text may be ______.
[A] DNA and Heredity
[B] The Genetic Revolution [C] A Biomedical Revolution
[D] How to Apply Genetic Technology 词汇注释
stuff 物质
preamble 开端
nook and cranny 排列
potency 力量
susceptible 易受感染的
predisposition 易患病的体质 难句讲解
1. They know that human DNA acts like a biological computer program some 3
billion bits long that spells out the instructions for making proteins， the
basic building blocks of life.
[简析] 本句话的主干是“They know that…”。they 指的是前面句子中提到的scientists;第一个引导的是宾语从句，some 3
billion bits long修饰computer program，第二个that也修饰computer program;the basic
building blocks of life是在解释proteins.
2. Anderson， who pioneered the first successful human gene-therapy
operations， is leading the campaign to put information about DNA to use as
quickly as possible in the treatment and prevention of human diseases.
[简析] 本句话的主干是“Anderson is leading the
campaign…”。Who引导的非限定性定语从句，修饰Anderson;to put information…短语修饰campaign，其中的to
use…作目的状语。
3. DNA in their hands has become both a blueprint and a drug， a
pharmacological substance of extraordinary potency that can treat not just
symptoms or the diseases that cause them but also the imperfections in DNA that
make people susceptible to a disease.
[简析] 本句话的主干是“DNA has become both a blueprint and a drug”。in their
hands修饰DNA;a pharmacological substance…是在解释前面的drug，其中的第一个that
引导的定语从句修饰pharmacological substance;第二个that引导的定语从句修饰imperfections.
4. And if scientists determine that a vital protein is missing because the
gene that was supposed to make it is defective， they might be able to give the
patient an artificial version of the protein.
[简析] 本句话的主干是“…they might be able to give the patient an artificial version
of the
protein”。If引导的是条件状语从句，其中的第一个that引导的是宾语从句，because引导的时原因状语从句;第二个that引导的定语从句修饰gene. 答案与解析
36. D 推论题。本题的问题是“根据本文，可以推知：柯林斯、安德森以及他们的众多同事”。题干中的“Collins and Anderson and
legions of
colleagues”出自文章第二段第一句话中，表明本题与第二段有关。第二段提到，柯林斯领导了“人类基因工程”研究项目，而安德森首创了人类第一次成功的基因治疗手术，并且正在领导一项有关DNA的研究活动;第三段接着介绍了他们掌握的DNA的作用。由此可知，这些研究人员对DNA的研究正在取得进步。[D]“正在取得DNA领域的突破”是对文中相关信息的概括，为正确答案。[A]“知道人类的DNA的作用就像一个生物学计算机程序”和[C]“在过去半个世纪里完成了一些基因发现”是第一段中提到的以前科学家的成果，不是柯林斯、安德森以及他们的同事的成果;[B]“发现了生命的基本构造元素”是针对文中“spells
out the instructions for making proteins，the basic building blocks of
life”这句话设置的干扰项。生命的基本构造元素是蛋白质，但这并不是这些研究人员发现的，所以[B]不对。
37. C 结构题。本题的问题是“文中引用柯林斯和安德森是为了表示下面各项，除了”。题干中的“Collins and
Anderson”出自文章第二段第一句话中，表明本题与第二段有关。第二段提到这两人时指出，柯林斯领导的研究项目历时15年，旨在绘制第一张人类DNA基因排列详细图表，而安德森首创了人类第一次成功的基因治疗手术，他正在领导的研究准备把有关DNA的信息尽可能迅速地用于治疗并预防人类的疾病;第三段提到，他们掌握的DNA可以治疗症状或者导致症状的疾病。这说明，[A]“为了完成人类DNA的详细基因图，需要付出很大的努力”、[B]“人类基因疗法手术可能被用来治疗患者一和[D]”有关DNA的信息可能被用来治疗并预防人类的疾病“体现了提到这两人的目的。[C]”如今，基因疗法普遍用于治疗并预防人类的疾病“明显与第四段第三句话的意思不符。
38. B
词义题。本题的问题是“单词‘pirate’(第三段第二行)最可能的意思是”。第三段提到该词时是说，这些人反向设计一种电脑芯片去窃取竞争对手的秘密。根据“Sili.”Vailev“可知，[A]”一个在海上抢劫或者从海上抢劫陆地的人“不对;本句话是把该词与genetic，engineers进行比较，说明该词应该是指_人，所以，[C]”通过盗版获得(某物)“和
[D]”没有得到授权利用或者复制(他人工作)“不对。只有[B]”一个没有得到授权利用或者复制他人工作的人“符合文意。
39. A
归纳题。本题的问题是“根据本文，我们可以得出结论”。文章前面三段介绍了遗传工程师取得的成就，第四段指出，科学离实现设定一个完美人类的梦想还很遥远，孝基因疗法普遍之前，人们还需要进行更多的研究。这说明，目前的科学还不能设定一个完美人类。[A]“设定完美的人目前还不可行”是对文中相关信息的改写，为正确答案。文中是说科学离设定完美土豆的梦想很遥远，但并没有说不可能，所以[B]“科学家要想设定一个完美的土豆是不可能的”与文意不符;[C]“许多疾病永远也不会被人类征服”是针对第四段最后一句话设置的干扰项，文中是说“许多疾病也需要花费几十年的时间去征服，如果它们可以被人类完全征服的话”，并不能说人类不能征服许多疾病，所以[C]不对;文中只是说“医生可以检测DNA中的所有缺陷”，并没有说可以治愈，所以[D]
“从长远来看，医生可能治愈DNA中的所有缺陷”不对。
40. B
主旨题。本题的问题是“本文的最佳标题可能是”。文章前面几段介绍了遗尊工程师取得的成就，后面两段介绍了科学家在将基因疗法用于治疗疾病方面面临的问题。这说明，本文主要是介绍基因领域的研究。[B]“基因革命”是对本文的恰当概括，可以表达本文的主题，为正确答案。DNA是科学家研究的具体内容，不是本文探讨的主题，所以[A]“DNA与遗传”不能表达本文的主题;[C]“一场生物医学革命”概念太广，不准确;有关新技术的利用是最后一段的内容，比较片面，所以[D]“如何应用基因技术”不能表达本文的主题。
It has long been known that the rate of oxidative metabolism (the process
that uses oxygen to convert food into energy) in any animal has a profound
effect on its living patterns. The high metabolic rate of small animals， for
example， gives them sustained power and activity per unit of weight， but at the
cost of requiring constant consumption of food and water. Very large animals，
with their relatively low metabolic rates， can survive well on a sporadic food
supply， but can gen- erate little metabolic energy per gram of body weight. If
only oxidative metabolic rate is considered， there- fore， one might assume that
smaller， more active， animals could prey on larger ones， at least if they
attacked in groups. Perhaps they could if it were not for anaerobic glycolysis，
the great equalizer.
Anaerobic glcolysis is a process in which energy is produced， without
oxygen， through the breakdown of muscle glycogen into lactic acid and adenosine
tri- phosphate (ATP)， the energy provider. The amount of energy that can be
produced anaerobically is a function of the amount of glycogen present-in all
vertebrates about 0.5 percent of their muscles' wet weight. Thus the anaerobic
energy reserves of a verte- brate are proportional to the size of the animal.
If， for example， some predators had attacked a 100-ton dinosaur， normally
torpid， the dinosaur would have been able to generate almost instantaneously，
via anaerobic glycolysis， the energy of 3，000 humans at maximum oxidative
metabolic energy production. This explains how many large species have managed
to compete with their more active neighbors： the compensation for a low
oxidative metabolic rate is glycolysis.
There are limitations， however， to this compensa- tion. The glycogen
reserves of any animal are good， at most， for only about two minutes at maximum
effort， after which only the normal oxidative metabolic source of energy
remains. With the conclusion of a burst of activity， the lactic acid level is
high in the body fluids， leaving the large animal vulnerable to attack until the
acid is reconverted， via oxidative metabolism， by the liver into glucose， which
is then sent (in part) back to the muscles for glycogen resyn- thesis. During
this process the enormous energy debt that the animal has run up through
anaerobic glycolysis must be repaid， a debt that is proportionally much greater
for the larger vertebrates than for the smaller ones. Whereas the tiny shrew can
replace in minutes the glycogen used for maximum effort， for example， the
gigantic dinosaur would have required more than three weeks. It might seem that
this inter- minably long recovery time in a large vertebrate would prove a grave
disadvantage for survival. Fortunately， muscle glycogen is used only when needed
and even then only in whatever quantity is necessary. Only in times of panic or
during mortal combat would the entire reserves be consumed.
1. What is the text mainly about?。
[A] refute a misconception about anaerobic glycolysis.
[B] introduce a new hypothesis about anaerobic glycolysis.
[C] describe the limitations of anaerobic glycolysis.
[D] explain anaerobic glycolysis and its effects on animal survival.
2. According to the author， glycogen is crucial to the process of anaerobic
glyrolysis because glycogen
[A] increases the organism‘s need for ATP.
[B] reduces the amount of ATP in the tissues.
[C] is an inhibitor of the oxidative metabolic production of ATP.
[D] is the material form which ATP is derived.
3. It is implied that the total anaerobic energy reserves of a vertebrate
are proportional to its size because
[A] larger vertebrate conserve more energy than smaller vertebrates.
[B] larger vertebrates use less oxygen per unit weight than smaller
vertebrates.
[C] the ability of a vertebrate to consume food is a function of its
size.
[D]the amount of muscle tissue in a vertebrate is directly related to its
size，
4. According to the text， a major limitation of anaerobic glycolysis is
that it can
[A] produce in large animals more lactic acid than the liver can safely
reconvert.
[B] necessitate a dangerously long recovery period in large animals.
[C] reduce energy more slowly than it can be used by large animals.
[D]consume all of the available glycogen regardless of need.
5. Which of the following audiences is the author most probably
addressing?
[A] College students in an introductory course on animal physiology.
[B] Historians of science investigating the discovery of anaerobic
glycolysis.
[C] Graduate students with specialized training in comparative anatomy.
[D] Zoologists interested in prehistoric animals. 参考答案：
1. D 主旨题。本题的问题是“本文主要是
关于什么?”文章第一段首先提到动物的氧化新陈代谢率对其生存方式造成的影响，随后引出了无氧糖酵解这个概念;第二段解释了无氧糖酵解，第三段介绍了无氧糖酵解的局限性以及对动物的生存产生的影响。这说明[D]“解释无氧糖酵解及其对动物生存产生的影响”可以表达本文的主题，为正确答案。文中没有提到有关无氧糖酵解的错误观念和新假说，所以[A]“反驳有关无氧糖酵解的一个错误概念”和[B]“介绍有关无氧糖酵解的一种新假说”属于无中生有;[C]“描述无氧糖酵解的局限性”只是第三段的内容，比较片面，不能表达本文的主题。
2. D
细节题。本题的问题是“根据作者的观点，糖原质对于无氧糖酵解的过程至关重要。因为糖原质——”。题干中的“glycogen”出自文章第二段第一句话中，表明本题与第二段有关。第二段在解释无氧糖酵解时提到，无氧糖酵解可以产生能量是糖原质存在的作用，其能量是由、肌糖原质分解成乳酸和三磷酸腺苷而产生的，而能量的供应者是三磷酸腺苷。这说明，糖原质是无氧糖酵解的能量来源，也就是三磷酸腺苷的来源。[D]“是从中获得三磷酸腺苷的物质”是对文章第二段中“through
the breakdown of muscle glycogen into lactic acid and adenosine
triphosphate(ATP)”这句话的改写，为正确答案。文中没有提到加大三磷酸腺苷的需求和降低其含量的问题，所以[A]“加大了生物体对三磷酸腺苷的需求”和[B]“降低了组织中三磷酸腺苷的含量”属于无中生有;[C]“是三磷酸腺苷的氧化新陈代谢生产的抑制者”与文意相反。
3. D 推论题。本题的问题是“文中暗示，脊椎动物的总无氧能源储备与其体型大小相称，因为 ”。题干中的“are proportional to its
size”出自文章第二段第三句话中，表明本题与第二段有关。第二段提到，糖原质大约占脊椎动物肌肉净重的0.5%，所以脊椎动物的无氧性能量储存同其体型的大小相称;随后列举的恐龙例if-解释了其中的原翻：由于恐龙的体型庞大，所以它可以通过无氧糖酵解在瞬间产生很大的能量。由此可知。肌肉越多，糖原质的含量就越多，而只有体型越大，肌肉才越多。[D]“脊椎动物体内的肌肉组织量同其体型大小直接相关”是对文章第二段中“the
anaerobic energy reserves of a vertebrate are proportional to the size of the
animal”这句话的改写，为正确答案。[A]“较大的脊椎动物储备的能量比较小的脊椎动物多”是针对文中“the anaerobic energy
reserves of a vertebrate are proportional to the size of the
animal”这句话设置的干扰项。而文中说的是脊椎动物的无氧性能量储存，并不是脊椎动物储备的能量，属于偷换概念，所以不对;文中只提到了消耗食物和水的问题，没有提到消耗氧气的问题，所以[B]“较大的脊椎动物每单位体重消耗的氧气比较小的脊椎动物少”属于偷换概念;[C]“脊椎动物消耗食物的能力是其体型的作用”是对文中“The
amount of energy that can be produced anaerobically is a functi0n of the amount
of glycogen present”这句话的篡改，与文意不符。
4. B 细节题。本题的问题是“根据本文的观点，无氧糖酵解的一个主要局限性就是，‘它能够
”。题干中的“limitation”出自文章第三段第一句话中，表明本题与第三段有关。第三段解释了补偿的局限性，指出，动物由于无氧糖酵解所导致的大量能量消耗必须得到补偿;随后举例说，小地鼠在几分钟内就能补偿其最剧烈运动所消耗的糖原质。但体型庞大的恐龙却需要三个多星期才能完成补偿。这说明，其主要局限性就是大型动物的补偿期时间长。[B]“使大型动物必须有长时间的补偿期”是对文中“the
gigantic dinosaur would have required more than three
weeks”这句话的改写，为正确答案。文中提到“reconvert”时是说“一阵剧烈运动结束后，体液中乳酸的含量就高，这使得大型动物容易受到攻击，直到乳酸通过氧化新陈代谢由肝脏再次转化成葡萄糖”，说明[A]“在大型动物体内生产的乳酸比肝脏可以再次转化的乳酸多”属于偷换概念;[C]“使能量减少的速度慢于大型动物使用能量的速度”与文意相反;[D]“消耗所有可以利用的糖原质，不管需不需要”与第三段最后一句话的意思不符。
5. A
推论题。本文的问题是“作者最可能针对下面哪类听众发表演说?”作者主要是介绍无氧糖酵解对动物的生存产生的影响，他的解释清楚易懂，没有提到深奥难懂的知识。由此可知，作者最可能是针对初学动物学的学生这类读者。[A]“动物生理学入门课的大学生”为正确答案。本文只是提到了无氧糖酵解，没有介绍如何发现它，并且所介绍的知识并不深奥，所以[B]“研究无氧糖酵解发现的历史科学家”不可能是作者针对的听众;本文并没有提到解剖学方面的知识，所以[C]“专业研究比较解剖学的研究生”属于无中生有;本文列举恐龙的例子只是为了说明无氧性能量储存同动物体型的大小相称这个问题，并没有提到其他史前动物，不可能吸引对史前动物感兴趣的动物学家，所以[D]“对史前动物感兴趣的动物学家”不可能是作者针对的听众。 全文译文
长期以来，人们一直知道，任何动物的氧化新陈代谢率(利用氧气将食物转化为能量的过程)都对其生存方式有着深刻的影响。比如，小型动物的高新陈代谢率可以给它们的每个重量单位提供持续不变的力量和活力，但是，这要以不断消耗食物和水为代价。由于大型动物的新陈代谢率相对较低，所以它们可以依赖时有时无的食物供给很好地生存，但是其每克体重生产的新陈代谢能量很少。1)因此，如果只考虑氧化新陈代谢率，那么人们可能认为，更小、更活跃的动物可以捕食较大型的动物，至少如果它们发动群体攻击的话会如此;也许它们可以做到这一点，如果不是因为无氧糖酵解这个重要的补偿机制的话。
无氧糖酵解是一个在无氧状态下通过把肌糖原质分解成乳酸和三磷酸腺苷(能量供应者)从而产生能量的过程。无氧糖酵解可以产生能量是糖原质存在的作用——糖原质大约占所有脊椎动物肌肉净重的0.5%.因此，脊椎动物的无氧性能量储存同其体型的大小相称。2)比如-如果某些食肉动物攻击了一只100吨重的恐龙。由于这类恐龙通常行动迟缓。所以它可能通过无氧糖酵解在瞬间产生3，000个人进行氧化新陈代谢所能产生的最大能量。这就解释了许多大型动物是如何设法与它们周围更活跃的动物竞争的原因：给低氧化新陈代谢率的补偿就是糖酵解。
不过，这种补偿有局限性。任何动物的糖原质储存最多只够维持大约两分钟的最剧烈运动，之后就只剩下正常的氧化新陈代谢能量来源。3)一阵剧烈运动结束后，体液中乳酸的含量就会高，这使得大型动物容易受到攻击，直到乳酸通过氧化新陈代谢由肝脏再次转化成葡萄糖，然后，葡萄糖(部分)被送回到肌肉进行糖原质的再合成。在这个过程中，动物由于无氧糖酵解所导致的大量能量消耗必须得到补偿——按比例来说，较大脊椎动物的这种消耗比较小动物大得多。比如，小地鼠在几分钟内就能补偿其最剧烈运动所消耗的糖原质，但是体型庞大的恐龙却需要三个多星期才能完成补偿。似乎可能的是，大型脊椎动物这种冗长的补偿时间被证明对其生存非常不利。幸运的是，只有在需要时才会使用肌糖原质，尽管那样，也只有在需要一定量的糖原质时才如此。只有在惊恐或者生死搏斗时，所有的能量储备才会被消耗。
=============
As you read this， nearly 80，000 Americans are waiting for a new heart，
kidney or some other organ that could save their life. Tragically， about 6，000
of them will die this year——nearly twice as many people as perished in the Sept.
11 attacks——because they won't get their transplant in time. The vast majority
of Americans (86%， according to one poll) say they support organ donation. But
only 20% actually sign up to do it. Why the shortfall?
Part of the problem is the way we handle organ donations. Americans who
want to make this sort of gift have to opt in——that is， indicate on a driver's
license that when they die， they want their organs to be made available. Many
European and Asian countries take the opposite approach; in Singapore， for
example， all residents receive a letter when they come of age informing them
that their organs may be harvested unless they explicitly object. In Belgium，
which adopted a similar presumed-consent system 12 years ago， less than 2% of
the population has decided to opt out.
Further complicating the situation in the U.S. is the fact that whatever
decision you make can be overruled by your family. The final say is left to your
surviving relatives， who must make up their minds in the critical hours after
brain death has been declared. There are as many as 50 body parts， from your
skin to your corneas， that can save or transform the life of a potential
recipient， but for many families lost in grief， the idea of dismembering a loved
one is more than they can bear.
The U.S.， like all medically advanced societies， has struggled to find a
way to balance an individual's rightful sovereignty over his or her body with
society's need to save its members from avoidable deaths. Given America's
tradition of rugged individualism and native distrust of Big Brotherly
interference， it's not surprising that voters resisted attempts to switch to a
presumed-consent system when it was proposed in California， Oregon， Minnesota，
Pennsylvania and Maryland. Health Secretary Tommy Thompson last spring announced
plans for a new initiative to encourage donations——including clearer consent
forms——but its impact is expected to be modest. Given the crying need for
organs， perhaps it's time we considered shifting to something closer to the
presumed-consent model.
Meanwhile， if you want to ensure that your organs are donated when you die，
you should say so in a living will or fill out a Uniform Donor Card (available
from the American Medical Association)。 Make sure your closest relatives know
about it. And if you don't want to donate an organ， you should make your wishes
equally explicit. 注(1)：本文选自Time; 12/10/2001， p117; 注(2)：本文习题命题模仿对象2003年真题text 3;
1. According to the author， one of the reasons for a shortage of organs in
America is ______.
[A] most Americans are reluctant to donate their organs after death
[B] the information about organ donation is not popular in America
[C] the ways to handle organ donation is far from perfect
[D] people waiting for transplant are rapidly increasing in America
2. What is most Americans‘ attitude towards the organ donation?
[A] Indifferent.
[B] Indignant.
[C] Detached.
[D] Supportive.
3. It can be inferred from paragraph 4 that ______.
[A] Americans have a long tradition of weak individualism
[B] all the states in America resist the presumed-consent system
[C] it‘s not easy to find a way to serve the society’s need and at the same
time to protect the individual‘s right in the matter of organ donation
[D] the government is not active in solving the problem
4. The term “presumed-consent” probably means ______.
[A] one‘s organs should be donated whether they agree or not
[B] one is supposed to agree that their organ will be donated after death
unless they explicitly object
[C] dismembering a dead body is inhuman
[D] one is assumed to be happy after they decide to donate their organs
5. From the text， we can see the author‘s attitude towards organ donation
is ______.
[A] supportive
[B] indignant
[C] indifferent
[D] negative 答案：CDCBA
Plowing through the New York Times on a recent Sunday， I read in the Metro
Section that infertile couples in the market for smart-kid genes regularly place
advertisements in the newspapers of their own Ivy League alma maters offering
female undergraduates $7，500 for a donated egg. Before I could get that news
comfortably digested， I came across an article in the Magazine section
describing SAT prep courses for which parents spend thousands in the hope of
raising their child's test scores enough to make admission to an Ivy League
college possible. So how can people who have found a potential egg donor at an
Ivy League college tell whether the donor carries genuine smart-kid genes or
just pushy-parents genes?
The donor herself may not even be aware that such a distinction exists.
After years of expensive private schooling and math tutors and tennis camps and
SAT prep courses and letters of recommendation from important family friends，
she's been told that， unlike beneficiaries of affirmative action， she got into
an Ivy League college on pure merit.
Since it is probably safe to assume that people intent on securing
high-priced Ivy League eggs are carrying some pushy-parents genes themselves，
their joining forces with a donor who got into an Ivy League college by dint of
her family's willingness to fork over 10 grand to an SAT prep course could
result in a child with somewhere between a dose and a half and 2 1/2 doses of
pushy-parents genes. Apparently the egg seekers aren't troubled by the prospect
of having their grandchildren raised by this sort of person.
If you have any doubts about whether the dosages I cite are based on a
thorough grounding in genetics and statistics and advanced microbiology， rest
assured that I attended an Ivy League college myself. That was in the days， I'll
admit， when any number of people were admitted to such institutions without
having shown any evidence of carrying smart-kid genes even in trace elements.
Somehow， most of these dimmer bulbs managed to graduate——every class needs a
lower third in order to have an upper two-thirds——and somehow most of them are
now millionaires on Wall Street.
One element many of them had going for them in the admissions process was
that they were identified as “legacies”——the offspring of alumni. In Ivy League
colleges， alumni children are even now admitted at twice the rate of other
applicants. For that reason， egg seekers may not actually need genuine smart-kid
genes for their children： after all， an applicant whose mother and father and
egg donor were all alumni could be considered a triple legacy.
But how about the college-admission prospects of the grandchildren? As
methods are perfected of enhancing a college application through increasingly
expensive services——one young man mentioned in the magazine article had $25，000
worth of SAT preparation——it might become more important to have a parent who's
a Wall Street millionaire than to have smart-kid genes. Maybe it would be
prudent to add a sentence to those ads in college papers： “Preference given to
respondents in the lower third of the class.” 注(1)：本文选自Time;01/25/99， p20; 注(2)：本文习题命题模仿对象为：1、2、3题模仿2000年真题text4
1-3题;4、5题分别模仿1999年真题text1第4题和text4第4题;
1. In the author‘s eyes， a female student from an Ivy League college
is__________.
[A] an ideal egg donor
[B] not necessarily an intelligent person
[C] more influenced by her parents than by anything else
[D] more likely to carry smart-kid genes
2. According to the author， what may chiefly be the reason for the donor‘s
admission in an
Ivy League college?
[A] her own merits
[B] the affirmative action
[C] her smart-kid genes
[D] her parents‘ efforts
3. Which of the following is true according to the author?
[A] American parents would send their children into an Ivy League college
at any cost
[B] Ivy League colleges used to admit students who showed no sign of
intelligence
[C] alumni children stand a better chance to be admitted than other
applicants
[D]egg-seekers care nothing about the pushy-parents genes
4. The author‘s attitude towards the issue seems to be ____________.
[A] approving
[B] objective
[C] indifferent
[D] ironic
5. It could be inferred from the text that____________.
[A] wealth is more important than intelligence in application for Ivy
League colleges
[B] Ivy League colleges are increasingly expensive
[C] egg-seekers can get better genes from millionaires
[D] the prospects of college-admission are gloomy 答案：B D C D A
The once radical notion that birds descended from dinosaurs——or may even be
dinosaurs， the only living branch of the family that ruled the earth eons
ago——has got stronger and stronger since paleontologists first started taking it
seriously a couple of decades ago. Remarkable similarities in bone structure
between dinos and birds were the first clue. Then came evidence， thanks to a
series of astonishing discoveries in China's Liaoning province over the past
five years， that some dinosaurs may have borne feathers. But a few scientists
still argued that the link was weak; the bone similarities could be a
coincidence， they said. And maybe those primitive structures visible in some
fossils were feathers——but maybe not. You had to use your imagination to see
them.
Not anymore. A spectacularly preserved fossil of a juvenile dinosaur，
announced by a team of paleontologists from the Chinese Academy of Geological
Sciences and New York City's American Museum of Natural History in the latest
issue of Nature， is about as good a missing link as anyone could want. “It has
things that are undeniably feathers，” exults Richard Prum， of the University of
Kansas Natural History Museum， an expert on the evolution of feathers. “But it
is clearly a small， vicious theropod similar to the velociraptors that chased
the kids around the kitchen in Jurassic Park.”
The find helps cement the dinosaur-bird connection， but it also casts new
light on the mystery of why nature invented feathers in the first place. For the
better part of a century， biologists have assumed that these specialized
structures evolved for flight， but that's clearly not true. “The feathers on
these dinosaurs aren't flight-worthy， and the animals couldn't fly，” says
paleontologist Kevin Padian， of the University of California， Berkeley. “They're
too big， and they don't have wings.” So what was the original purpose of
feathers? Nobody knows for sure; they might have been useful for keeping dinos
dry， distracting predators or attracting mates， as peacocks do today.
But many biologists suspect that feathers originally arose to keep
dinosaurs warm. The bone structure of dinosaurs shows that， unlike modern
reptiles， they grew as fast as birds and mammals——which dovetails with a growing
body of evidence that dinos were， in fact， warm-blooded. Says Padian： “They must
have had a high basal metabolic rate to grow that fast. And I wouldn't be
surprised if they had some sort of skin covering for insulation when they were
small.” Says Norell： “Even baby tyrannosaurs probably looked like this one.”
At the rate feathered dinosaurs are turning up， it shouldn't take long to
solidify scientists' understanding of precisely how and why feathers first arose
and when the first birdlike creature realized they were useful for flight.
Meanwhile， kids had better get used to the idea that T. rex may have started
life looking an awful lot like Tweety Bird. 注：(1)本文选自New York Times;05/07/2001， p56， 2p， 1 map， 2c 注：(2)本文习题命题模仿对象1999年真题text2(1、2、3、5)和text4第3题(4)
1. We learn from the beginning of the passage that ________________.
[A] scientists are split as to whether birds descended from dinosaurs
[B] the bone similarities between birds and dinosaurs are a coincidence
[C] fossils have proven that birds evolved from dinosaurs
[D] the idea that birds are connected with dinosaurs has always been taken
seriously
2. Speaking of the recently-announced fossil of a juvenile dinosaur， the
author implies that ______.
[A] it shows vividly how dinosaur flies
[B] it brings new mystery to paleontologists
[C] it further proves the link between birds and dinosaurs
[D] it solves the puzzle of birds‘ evolution
3. In the view of Kevin Padian， the feathers on those dinosaurs
____________.
[A] were of no practical value
[B] were useful for flight
[C] could protect dinosaurs from their natural enemy
[D] were good for insulation
4. The original purpose of feather was___________.
[A] to help dinosaurs fly
[B] to keep dinosaurs warm
[C] to distract predators
[D] a mystery
5. We learn from the last paragraph that __________.
[A] a baby dinosaur looks like a bird
[B] T-rex is a kind of dinosaur figure familiar to kids
[C] living feathered dinosaurs can still be found in certain parts of the
world
[D] scientists understand precisely how and why feathers first arose 答案：A C D D B
If you wanted to question whether global warming is indeed upon us， last
week was not the time to do it. Two weeks before the official beginning of
summer， a heat wave baked the eastern third of the U.S. and Canada， driving
temperatures high into the 90s and even 100s. At the same time， a flurry of
scientific papers was released that seemed to explain all the late-spring
suffering. In one study， French researchers reported that heat-trapping
greenhouse gases are at their highest levels in 420，000 years. In another， U.S.
scientists found that 57 species of butterfly may be altering their migratory
patterns in response to changing heat patterns.
In light of all this， a sweltering public must have been convinced at last
that it's time to do something to cool off the overheated planet， right? Wrong.
Even as the temperature was climbing， a new survey by the American Geophysical
Union found that Americans are less concerned than ever about combatting global
warming. “The more we talk about warming，” says the study's director， John
Immerwahr， “the [more the] public's concern goes down.”
Such an environmental disconnect may not be much of a mystery.
Environmentalists complain that over the past two years industry groups have
launched a coordinated advertising campaign to torpedo the 1997 Kyoto treaty，
which requires industrial nations to reduce greenhouse emissions. More than $13
million has been spent on ads to block ratification of the treaty by the U.S.
Senate. “The purpose of the ads was to convince most Americans that there isn't
a problem or that it's too expensive to fix，” says National Environmental Trust
spokesman Peter Kelly.
Environmentalists also criticize President Clinton for what they believe is
his failure to press the issue. Only last week， Clinton moved for Kyoto treaty
changes that environmental groups see as industry-pleasing loopholes. Says
Daniel Weiss， the Sierra Club's political director： “Timid leaders communicate
hopelessness.” And hopelessness breeds indifference. If such popular so-whating
persists， Immerwahr warns， the public may begin grasping at phony solutions to
global warming. At the end of last week， some people took comfort from the
report of a vast haze of pollutants that collects over the Indian Ocean in the
winter， but that researchers only recently studied. Filthy as the cloud is， it
does deflect solar radiation， and that could lead to cooling. But scientists
warn that we cannot simply pollute our way out of global warming. The soot drops
from the hazy atmosphere in weeks， whereas greenhouse gases remain for
centuries.
The way out of this gridlock， environmentalists say， is to show it's
possible to reduce greenhouse gases without sinking the economy. Solutions
include cleaner cars and better wind- and solar-power technologies. Says Greg
Wetstone， program director for the Natural Resources Defense Council： “When
these kinds of options become available， people will feel less hopeless.” Of
course， it's also possible that only when people feel less hopeless will they
press their leaders to make the solutions available. 注(1)：本文选自Time;06/21/99， p62， 3/4p， 2c. 注(2)：本文习题命题模仿对象1998年text2和1997年text3第4题
1. According to the author， global warming is ___________.
[A] causing a lot of trouble
[B] not as serious as it seems
[C] felt only in America and Canada
[D] what accounts for the high level of greenhouse gases
2. Speaking of global warming， American public is ______________.
[A] concerned
[B] indifferent
[C] worried
[D] frightened
3. The public‘s reaction to global warming is mainly a result of
_____________.
[A] their disbelief of the existence of such problem
[B] the advertising campaign of industrial groups
[C] the high cost of fixing the problem
[D] American Senate‘s disapproval of Kyoto treaty
4. Which of the following is NOT mentioned in the passage?
[A] Environmentalists urge President Clinton administration to press the
issue.
[B] Kyoto treaty aims at curbing the global warming problem.
[C] American government is partly responsible for the public‘s attitude
toward global warming.
[D] Industrial groups do not care about global warming.
5. It can be inferred from the passage that _____________.
[A] environmentalists support the idea of solving global warming through
pollution
[B] the poor leadership of American President has produced a very bad
influence
[C] American economy will suffer if global warming is curbed
[D] people have no confidence in solving problem of global warming 答案：A B B A B
For 30 years， Smithsonian Institution archeologist Dennis Stanford searched
in vain for the origins of the first Americans. Every textbook described how
mammoth-hunters from Siberia had migrated across the Bering land bridge about
12，000 years ago and had slowly wandered south and east until they filled the
New World. In each of their settlements， this theory held， the original
Americans left their calling cards： distinctively shaped spear points named
after the site in Clovis， N.M.， where the stone tips were first unearthed. If
this account was right， Stanford reasoned， then Siberia should be littered with
similar points. But not a single Clovis point has turned up in Siberia. And now
Stanford has a radical new proposal to explain why. Clovis people， he thinks，
came from Europe——arriving 15，000 years before Columbus， and by boat. “They were
from Iberia， not Siberia，” Stanford told startled colleagues at an archeology
conference last month.
Debate over a European connection has dogged anthropology in recent months，
though until now no one of Stanford's stature had stated it so un-equivocally
and publicly. But the similarities between the oddly shaped stone points of
Clovis and the European culture called Solutrean strongly suggest this
conclusion， say Stanford and colleague Bruce Bradley. Moreover， tools recently
found beneath Clovis-era layers at a dig in Cactus Hill， Va.——about where
European itinerants could have first landed——also resemble Solutrean artifacts.
The Solutrean theory poses similar questions to those raised by Kennewick Man，
the 8，400-year-old skeleton found in Washington state in 1996 and initially
called European by an anthropologist. A new federal study to help determine
whether K-Man's remains should be turned over to local tribes just concluded
that the body looked more Asian than European， though not Siberian. But it
didn't match any modern Indian tribe， a finding that Indians see as the latest
scheme to deny tribes the right to repatriate and rebury such remains.
Native Americans aren't the only ones dismayed by the Euro theory.
Solutrean expert Lawrence Straus， an anthropology professor at the University of
New Mexico， dismisses the resemblance between the spear points as an instance of
two cultures' arriving at a similar idea independently. “This is a classic case
of convergence，” says Straus. “And it's not even a tricky case.” Moreover，
Solutrean culture ended 17，000 years ago， at least 5，000 years before the first
evidence of Clovis culture. And there is no evidence that Solutreans had the
requisite boats to paddle across the North Atlantic.
Many scientists grumble that Stanford should publish his findings in
peer-reviewed journals be-fore talking in public. Stanford promises to publish
soon， but in the meantime， he says， “I'm trying to get people to think more
broadly.” No argument there. 注(1)：本文选自Newsweek; 11/15/99， p71; 注(2)：本文习题命题模仿对象2004年真题Text 4
1. What does Stanford think of the origins of the first Americans?
[A]He thinks that the first Americans came from Clovis， N.M.
[B]He agrees with the common idea that the first Americans came from
Siberia.
[C]He thinks that the first Americans came from Europe.
[D]He thinks that it was people from Iberia who first invented the boat and
came to America.
2. We can learn from the text that Indian tribes regard the results of the
federal study as _______.
[A]a tricky scheme
[B]convincing enough
[C]a cute trap
[D]unreasonable
3. The views of Lawrence Straus and Stanford are _________.
[A]identical
[B]similar
[C]complementary
[D]opposite
4. According to Lawrence Straus， the spear points __________.
[A]show the products makers came from the same culture
[B]do not show any connection between the two cultures
[C]are not the products of the different inhabitants
[D]show the resemblance of the two different cultures
5. Which of the following statement is true?
[A]K-Man's remains helped to certify Stanford‘s assertion.
[B]The first Americans came from Europe by boat.
[C]Anthropologists fail to make such a certain statement as Stanford.
[D]It was the Indian tribes‘ rights to rebury the K-Man's remains. 答案：CADBC
The basic workings of DNA and RNA are no mystery. It's now well known that
DNA consists of four nucleotide “bases” (A， T， C and G)， whose linear sequences
(AATAGGCTCC……) encode hereditary information. Genes——discrete segments of long
DNA molecules——transcribe their sequences onto single-strand messenger RNA
molecules， which then serve as templates for proteins. In short， DNA makes
messenger RNA， and messenger RNA makes proteins. The production of a particular
protein is the goal of each gene. This 50-year-old insight is the bedrock of
modern biology， but science has not fully solved a related mystery. If every
cell in an organism contains the same full complement of genes， why are the
cells themselves so varied? How do different genes get turned on (“expressed”)
or off (“silenced”) in just the right combinations to produce heart cells， bone
cells and brain cells?
That's where microRNA enters the picture. In the early 1990s， researchers
studying a species of worm discovered genes for a very short and very unusual
piece of RNA. Instead of synthesizing proteins， this tiny RNA molecule latched
onto messenger RNAs (chart)， causing their destruction. Without messenger RNA，
no protein was produced. In effect， the gene for that protein had been silenced.
The discovery was initially dismissed as an oddity in a worm， but scientists
have since found genes for hundreds of microRNAs in various plants and
animals——200 in humans alone. Many of these genes have survived in identical
forms in different species， indicating that they are essential to life. What，
exactly， is their role? We now suspect that by silencing particular genes at
just the right times——a process called RNA interference——they push genetically
identical cells down different paths of development， enabling some to digest
food while others perceive light.
RNA interference gives researchers a new tool for understanding how living
things grow——how a plant assumes a particular shape， for example， or how a
baby's hand forms during gestation. Moreover， because microRNAs are so small and
simple in structure， they can be manufactured for use as research tools. If
scientists suspect that a particular gene is responsible for a disease， they can
design microRNA to silence the gene in affected laboratory animals. If the
disease is prevented or cured， the gene becomes a target for treatment.
RNA interference has yet to generate new medicines， but if the technique
fulfills its promise， it could help us treat everything from viral infections to
cancer. MicroRNAs could be used to seal off human cells from disease-causing
viruses， or to disable viruses that gain entry. In a recent test-tube study，
researchers showed that RNA interference could make cells impermeable to HIV.
Early studies suggest that microRNAs can also boost the production of stem cells
in culture. By blocking production of growth-promoting proteins， microRNAs may
even help contain cancer cells.
It is one thing to manipulate cells in a test tube， quite another to treat
people. Getting microRNAs safely into the right cells in the body will be
complicated. No one has yet attempted a human experiment. Even so， a field that
was just a curiosity in 1993 is now poised to change the world——all because we
invested in basic research. The scientists who discovered microRNAs were not
trying to prevent AIDS， grow stem cells or treat cancer. They just wanted to
figure out how something happened in a worm. As Buckminster Fuller observed，
“Development is programmable; discovery is not.” 注(1)：本文选自Newsweek; 12/8/2003， p96-96， 1p， 1 diagram，
1c; 注(2)：本文习题命题模仿对象2004年真题Text 3;
1. The expression “silenced”(Line 5， Paragraph 2) most probably means
_________.
[A]ruined
[B]destroyed
[C]killed
[D]stopped
2. How does the author feel about the study of MicroRNA?
[A]Optimistic.
[B]Confused.
[C]Frightening.
[D]Shocking.
3. When mentioning “It is one thing to manipulate cells in a test tube，
quite another to treat people.”(Line 1， Paragraph 5)， the author implies that
__________.
[A]the test of cells and the treatment of people are unrelated to each
other
[B]the treatment of people is more complex than the cells in the
laboratory
[C]more emphasis should be laid on the human tests
[D]human treatment may not be successful
4. What does Buckminster Fuller mean by “Development is programmable;
discovery is not.”(Last Line， Last Paragraph)?
[A]Discovery is always made beyond one‘s expectation.
[B]Development is easier than discovery.
[C]Development lacks curiosity while discovery does not.
[D]Development is less important than discovery.
5.Which of the following is not true about RNA interference?
[A]It prevents disease-causing viruses from entering human body.
[B]It improves the production of stem cells.
[C]It can cure of all kinds of human diseases.
[D]It silences certain protein to prevent tumor. 答案：DABAC
Half the game is 90 percent mental，“ Yogi Berra once said， or something
like that， and science is now getting around to putting his aphorism to the
test. Researchers including Debbie Crews of Arizona State University and John
Milton of the University of Chicago have been studying patterns of brain
activation——not in baseball players but in golfers， who make better subjects
because they don't move around as much and the electrodes stay stuck to their
heads. Yogi might have been surprised by the researchers' conclusion， though：
the better the golfer， the less brain activity he shows in the seconds before he
makes his shot.
Crews， a sports psychologist who studies putting——even the minimal
agitation of a chip shot can upset her experimental apparatus——has found that a
key difference between amateurs and pros lies in the left hemisphere. This is
the seat of logic， analysis， verbal reasoning and the kinds of thoughts——Maybe I
should just kind of squinch over a little more to the left——that you never
imagine crossing Tiger Woods's mind. Professionals， once they've determined how
to make a shot， follow an invariable routine that renders conscious thought
unnecessary. “How you think is probably more important than what you think，”
Crews says. “Quieting the left hemisphere is really critical.”
Or， to put it another way， when Milton asked some LPGA golfers what they
thought about just before taking a shot， they answered： nothing. To test this，
he rounded up a half-dozen pros and an equal number of amateurs and had them
imagine making a specific shot——a wedge shot of 100 yards to the green， with no
wind——while monitoring their brains in a functional magnetic resonance imaging
machine. “The professionals are just much more specialized and efficient，”
Milton says. “You put in a quarter and you get your shot.” The amateurs， by
contrast， showed more total brain activation， involving more areas of the brain.
In particular， amateurs activated the basal ganglia——involved in learning motor
functions——and the basal forebrain and amygdala， responsible for， among other
functions， emotions. “They're not fearful or anxious，” Milton says， “but they
get overwhelmed by details， by the memories of all the shots they've missed in
the past.” Some of his subjects worried about hitting the ball into the water，
which was curious， because he hadn't even mentioned a water hazard in describing
the imaginary shot to them.
Professional athletes， as a rule， know how to keep focus， although there
are exceptions， like Chuck Knoblauch， the Yankee second baseman who suddenly
lost the ability to make a routine throw to first base. Milton is already trying
to apply these lessons to stroke and other rehabilitation patients who have to
relearn skills like walking; he recommends putting more emphasis on
visualization and improving mental focus. In many aspects of life， it seems，
half the game really is 90 percent mental. 注(1)：本文选自Newsweek; 6/2/2003， p14; 注(2)：本文习题命题模仿对象2004年真题Text 4(个别题目顺序加以调整);
1. The views of Yogi Berra and researchers including Crews and Milton are
________.
[A]similar
[B]identical
[C]opposite
[D]complementary
2. We can learn from the text that the difference between pros and amateurs
lies in_______.
[A]the activity of the left hemisphere
[B]the way of their thinking
[C]the ability to control one‘s brain
[D]the ability to forget the past failures
3. Tiger Woods， according to the text， is probably ________.
[A]a professional golf player
[B]a professional baseball player
[C]a sports psychologist
[D]a researcher
4. What is the key to the success of golfers according to the text?
[A]Not to think of anything related to your past losses.
[B]To be more specialized and efficient.
[C]Try to activate your whole brain.
[D]Quiet your left hemisphere and think of nothing.
5. What can we learn from the last paragraph?
[A]What the researchers have found proves Yogi Berra‘s words.
[B]Baseball player should do as Yogi Berra said.
[C]Mentality plays a very important role in many aspects of life.
[D]Sports and medicine share some common principles. 答案：CADBC
The sun is not growing weaker， yet its light appears to be dimming. Between
1960 and 1990， some scientists believe， the amount of solar radiation reaching
Earth's surface may have declined as much as 10%——and in some places， Hong Kong，
for example， more than 35%.
What was going on? Well， it appears that increased air pollution during
those 30 years——over Asia， in particular——with the help， perhaps， of some
increased cloudiness， may have exerted a cooling influence on the surface of the
planet even as carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases were encouraging the
atmosphere to warm. The impacts of that tug-of-war on the climate system could
be devilishly difficult to untangle. At the same time， no task could be more
urgent. For if global pollution has helped keep global warming in check， says
Veerabhadran Ramanathan， an atmospheric scientist at the University of
California at San Diego， then the full impact of the buildup of greenhouse gases
has yet to be felt. This week， at the American Geophysical Union meeting in
Montreal， Ramanathan and others will be presenting the latest data on the
solar-dimming problem and pondering its implications for the climate system as a
whole.
Many scenarios for global warming， for example， invoke a speedup in the
hydrological cycle by which water evaporates and then comes down as rain. The
cooling produced by solar dimming， however， may slow the rate of evaporation，
while higher up in the atmosphere the pollutants responsible for absorbing and
reflecting sunlight are likely to interfere with the process that produces
rain.
Why? These pollutants， which take the form of tiny， airborne particles
called aerosols， act as nuclei around which cloud droplets form. The problem is，
there are too many aerosols in the atmosphere competing for water molecules， so
the cloud droplets that form are too small and never become weighty enough to
fall to the ground. As a result， says Beate Liepert， an atmospheric physicist at
Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory， the atmosphere could be
filled with moisture while Earth's surface thirsts for rain.
Many questions remain， including the true extent of the dimming. One
analysis pegs the average worldwide darkening to be about 4% over three decades，
while another computes it to be more than twice that much. There are also
questions about the reliability of the devices that measure the sunlight
reaching Earth's surface. Known as radiometers， these instruments are nothing
more than flat， black solar collectors capped with glass. They are sometimes
finicky; a smudge of dirt or a speck of dust can cause bogus readings and change
the calculated results.
Solar dimming， in other words， is a problem still in the process of being
defined， and as its dimensions become cle
转眼间霜降已过，一阵阵北风让树叶纷纷凋落，2019的考生即将迎来考验的大时刻，这个阶段更要稳住步伐不慌不乱，跨小考期待与你考后在跨考教育导师库相见，那时再为已经通过初试，准备复试的你助力！
据相关调查统计显示，以就业为导向，想要提高自身就业筹码而选择考研的考生占整体的近70%，准备开启2020考研征程的你，是为了什么而一往无前呢？为了给自己一个选择的机会，也为了更了解将来就业企业的择人标准，你需要趁这个寒假为考研开启预热模式——跨考寒假预科班，15天集训，直接定校定专业，让你全年的复习不再左摇右摆浪费时间！
发表于 2018-11-17 13:03:17