高考?xì)v年英語閱讀理解—科普知識類

1、高考?xì)v年英語閱讀理解科普知識類Ever since they were first put on the market in the early 1990s, gentically mondified （GM, 轉(zhuǎn)基因 ） foods have been increasingly developed and marketed in many countries in the word,mainly on the basis of their promise to end the worldwide food crisis. But can GM technology solve world h

2、unger problems? Even if it would ,is it the best solutiorr?Despite what it promiises,GM technology actually has not increased the production potential of any corp. In factStudies show that the most crown GM croo.GM soybeans, has suffered reduced productivity. For instance, a report than analysed nea

3、rly two decades of research on mojor GM food crops shows that GM engineering has failed to significantly increase US crop production.Something else, however, has been on the rise, While GM seeds are expensive, GM companics tell farmers that they will make good profits by saving money on pesticides（

4、殺蟲劑 ）. On the contrary, US government data show that GM crops in the US have produced an overall increase in pesticide use compared to traditional crops. “ The promise was that you could use less chemicals and boost production. But nether is true,”said Bill Christison, President of the US National F

5、arm Coalition.At the same time, the authors of the book World Hunger Twelve Myths argue that there actually is more than enough food in the world and that the hunger crisis is not caused by production, but by problems in food distribution and politics.These indeed deserve our efforts and money. Mean

6、while, the rise in food prices results from the increased use of crops for fuel rather than food, according to a 2008 World Bank report.As a matter of fact ,scientists see better ways to feed the world. Another World Bank report concluded that GM crops have little to offer to the challenges of world

7、wide poverty and hunger, because better ways out are available, among which “green ” farming is supposed to be the first choice.57.The author develops the second paragraph mainly .【 C】A. by classification B. by comparison1. by example D. by process58. What does the underlined word “ boost ” in the t

8、hird paragraph probably mean?【 D】A. Control. B. Evaluate C. Obtain. D. Increase.59. GM companies promise farmers that they will benefit from .【 B】A. practic ing “green ” farming B. use of less chemicalsC. fair distribution of their crops D. using more crops for fuel60. Which of the following best de

9、scribes the attitude of the author towards GM technology?【 C】A. Optimistic B. Defensive C. Disapproving D. Casual科普知識類第二篇（2011 重慶卷 ）CGetting rid of dirt, in the opinion of most people, is a good thing. However, there is nothing fixed about attitudes to dirt.In the early 16th century, people thought

10、that dirt on the skin was a means to block out disease, as medical opinion had it that washing off dirt with hot water could open up the skin and let ills in. A particular danger was thought to lie in public baths. By 1538, the French king had closed the bath houses in his kingdom. So did the king o

11、f England in 1546.Thus began a long time when the rich and the poor in Europe lived with dirt in a friendly way. Henry IV, King of France, was famously dirty. Upon learning that a nobleman had taken a bath, the king ordered that, to avoid the attack of disease, the nobleman should not go out.Though

12、the belief in the merit of dirt was long-lived, dirt has no longer been regarded as a nice neighbor ever since the 18th century. Scientifically speaking, cleaning away dirt is good to health. Clean water supply and hand washing are practical means of preventing disease. Yet, it seems that standards

13、of cleanliness have moved beyond science since World War H . Advertisements repeatedly sell the idea clothes need to be whiter than white, cloths ever softer, surfaces to shine. Has the hate for dirt, however, gone too far?Attitudes to dirt still differ hugely nowadays. Many first-time parents nervo

14、usly try to warn their children off touching dirt, which might be responsible for the spread ofdisease.On the contrary, Mary Ruebush, an American immunologist（ 免疫學(xué)家 ） ， encourages children to play in the dirt to build up a strong immune system. And the latter position is gaining some ground.64 . The

15、 kings of France and England in the 16th century closed bath houses because .A. they lived healthily in a dirty environment.B. they thought bath houses were too dirty to stay inC. they believed disease could be spread in public bathsD. they considered bathing as the cause of skin disease65 .Which of

16、 the following best describes Henry IV sattitude to bathing?A. Afraid. B. Curious.C. Approving. D. Uninterested.66. How does the passage mainly develop?A. By providing examples.B. By making comparisons.C. By following the order of time.D. By following the order of importance.67. What is the author s

17、 purpose in writing the passage?A. To stress the role of dirt.B. To introduce the history of dirt.C. To call attention to the danger of dirt.D. To present the change of views on dirt.【答案】 CA CD科普知識類第三篇（2011 湖南卷 ）CA recent study of ancient and modern elephants has come up with the unexpected conclusi

18、on that the African elephant is divided into two distinct （ 不同的 ） speciesThe discovery was made by researchers at York and Harvard universities when they were examining the genetic relationship between the ancient woolly mammoth and mastodon to modern elephants the Asian elephant, African forest ele

19、phant and African savanna elephantOnce they obtained DNA sequences （ 序列 ） from two fossils （ 化石 ） ， mammoths and mastodons the team compared them with DNA from modern elephants. They found to their amazement that modern forest and savanna elephants are as distinct from each other as Asian elephants

20、and mammoths.The scientists used detailed genetic analysis to prove that the African savanna elephants and the African forest elephants have been distinct species for several million years. The divergence of the two species took place around the time of the divergence of Asian elephants and woolly m

21、ammoths. This result amazed all the scientists.There has long been debate in the scientific community that the two might be separate species but this is the mostconvincing scientific evidence so far that they are indeed different species.Previously, many naturalists believed that African savanna ele

22、phants and African forest elephants were two populations of the same species despite the elephantssignificant size differences. The savanna elephant has an average shoulder height of 3.5metres while the forest elephant has an average shoulder height of 2.5metres. The savanna elephant weighs between

23、six and seven tons, roughly double the weight of the forest elephant. But the fact that they look so different does not necessarily mean they are different species. However, the proof lay in the analysis of the DNA.Alfred Roca, assistant professor in the department of Animal Sciences at the Universi

24、ty of Minois, said,“We nowhave to treat the forest and savanna elephants as two different units for conservation purpose. Since 1950 all African elephants have been conserved as one species. Now that we know the forest and savanna elephants are two very distinct animals, the forest elephant should b

25、ecome a bigger priority （ 優(yōu)先 ）for conservation purpose .”66. One of the fossils studied by the researchers is that of .A. the Asian elephant B. the forest elephantC. the savanna elephant D. the mastodon elephant67. The underlined word “ divergence ” in paragraphA «力4means “”A. evolution B. exhibition C. separation D. examination68. The researcher s conclusion was based on a study of the African elephant s A. DNA B. height C. weight D. population69. Wh