单选题 The Belgian blue is an ugly but tasty cow that has 40% more muscle than it should have. It is the product of random mutation followed by selective breeding—as, indeed, are all domesticated creatures. But where an old art has led, a new one may follow. By understanding which genetic changes have been consolidated in the Belgian blue, it may be possible to design and build similar versions of other species using genetic engineering as a short-cut. And that is precisely what Terry Bradley, a fish biologist at the University of Rhode Island, is trying to do. Instead of cattle, he is doing it in trout. His is one of two projects that may soon put the first biotech animals on the dinner table. The other project is led by Aqua Bounty.
It is one thing to make such fish, of course. It is quite another to get them to market. First, it is necessary to receive the approval of the regulators. In America, the relevant regulator is the Food and Drug Administration ( FDA), which Aqua Bounty says it has been petitioning for more than a decade and which published guidelines for approving genetically engineered animals in 2009. Aqua Bounty has now filed its remaining studies for approval, and hopes to hear the result this year. Dr Bradley has not yet applied for approval.
The FDA is concerned mainly with the healthfulness of what people put in their mouths, and it seems unlikely that the new procedures will yield something that is unsafe to eat. But what happens if the creatures escape and start breeding in the wild? For that to be a problem, the modified fish would have to be better at surviving and reproducing than those honed by millions of years of natural selection. On the face of it, this seems unlikely, because the characteristics that have been engineered into them are ones designed to make them into better food, rather than lean, mean breeding machines.
But there is a chink in this argument. As Mark Abrahams, a biologist at Memorial University in Newfoundland, points out, it is not just the fish that have been modified by man, but also the environment in which they could escape. Many of the creatures that eat salmon and trout, such as bears and some birds, have had their ranks thinned by human activity. Dr Abrahams thinks it possible that fast-growing salmon could displace the natural sort in places where predators are rare.
Aqua Bounty is addressing such concerns by subjecting developing eggs to high pressures. The result, if all goes well, will be that animals follow plants down the biotech route. Whether people will actually want to buy or eat the new fish is a different matter— though they buy the meat of Belgian blue cattle at a premium. Perhaps clever marketing could make "double-muscled" fish into a premium product, too. If people will pay extra for meat from a monstrosity like the Belgian blue, anything is possible.

单选题 How was Belgian blue being created?
A. It was produced like all other domesticated creatures.
B. It was produced by natural breeding.
C. It was produced using genetic engineering as a short-cut.
D. It was a product of cross breeding.

【正确答案】 A

【答案解析】具体细节题
[解析] 文章第一段具体介绍了比利时蓝牛培育的过程，但是由于一些关键词汇比较难，语句较长，因此此题有一定难度。关键在于对这句话的理解：It is the product of random mutation followed by selective breeding—as, indeed, are all domesticated creatures．它是随机突变后加以选择培育的产品。破折号后面的这句话尤为关键，“这正和其他的家畜培育过程一样”。由此可判断[A]选项正确。紧接着，在确定了比利时蓝牛体内是哪种基因产生突变使其肌肉量突增后，可以利用基因工程有针对性地在其他动物体内加入这种基因，这是基因工程带来的一条捷径。[C]选项很具迷惑性，using genetic engineering as a short-cut是根据原文设置的干扰项。但是利用基因工程作为捷径培育出来的并不是比利时蓝牛，而是后文提到的“基因鱼”，比利时蓝牛是基因工程的蓝本。[B]选项natural breeding，自然培育，也不正确，虽然比利时蓝牛不能算作基因工程的产物，但是也是经过人类选择育种培育的，不再是自然培育。[D]选项cross breeding，“杂交”，属错误选项。通过这几个选项，同学们也可以学习几个相关的和基因工程有关的词汇。

单选题 What is true according to the text?
A. FDA has not approved the selling of genetically modified food and animals until 2009.
B. Aqua Bounty is behind Terry Bradley in submitting the application for approval of their recent studies.
C. The creation of Belgian Blue has provided scientists with necessary genetic information to create double-muscled fish.
D. Consumers are so concerned with what they put into their mouth that nobody can influence their decision about what to buy.

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】综合细节题
[解析] 这类综合细节题考查的范围基本覆盖全文，关键是要锁定每个选项在原文中的位置，根据上下文逐一判断。[A]选项出处在原文第二段，原句是Food and Drug Administration (FDA)...published guidelines for approving genetically engineered animals in 2009．[A]选项错在将原文里的genefically engineered animals改成了food and animals。事实上转基因食品的早在很多年前就已经上市了。[B]选项仍然考查第二段的内容，同时研究转基因鱼的两个机构，一个由Terry Bradley领导，一个由Aqua Bounty领导，他们向FDA申请的时间按照原文所述，应该是Aqua Bounty在前，而Terry Bradley还未有行动，故[B]错误。[C]选项考查对文章第一段内容的理解，前面已经就第一题比利时蓝牛和双肌鱼的关系做了解释，比利时蓝牛虽然本身不是转基因动物，但是它体内突变的与肌肉增多有关的基因可以为科学家所用，用来创造双肌鱼，故[C]正确。[D]选项考查对最后一段关于消费者对于转基因动物的态度。这一段里有一个关键词marketing(“营销”)，通过聪明的营销手段，推销人员已经让消费者接纳了比利时蓝牛，他们甚至愿意出高价购买这种奇怪的牛肉。由此可见，消费者虽然对自己吃进嘴里的食物很在意，但是也很容易受别人的左右，故[D]错误。

单选题 What is the author's attitude towards the market prospect of double-muscled fish?
A. Confident.
B. Ambivalent.
C. Expectant.
D. Indifferent.

单选题 What concerns Mark Abrahams most is that the modified fish will ______.
A. escape into the wild to breed abundantly
B. break the rule of natural selection
C. generate unknown harm to human body
D. replace natural fish as a result of less predator

【正确答案】 D

【答案解析】作者态度题
[解析] 文中第三段和第四段集中探讨了人们对转基因鱼的担忧。第三段提到人们对于转基因鱼是否可以安全使用提出了质疑，但是作者否定了这一质疑。又有人提出转基因鱼如果进入野生环境，会大量繁殖，打破生态平衡。但是作者认为，转基因鱼的繁殖能力并不会比自然生长的鱼更强，因此，这种担忧也没有必要。第四段着重讨论了Mark Abrahams的担忧，他提到了另外一个问题，即人不仅改变了动物的基因，也早已改变了自然环境。自然环境中鳟鱼的天敌数量已经因为自然环境的变化而急剧下降，因为这个原因，双肌鱼的数量可能会超过自然生长的鱼。故[D]正确。