单选题{{B}}第二篇{{/B}} Botany, the study of plants, occupies a peculiar position in the history of human knowledge. For not many thousands of years it was the one field of awareness about which humans had anything more than the vaguest of insights(了解). It is impossible to know today just what our Stone Age ancestors knew about plants. But from what we can observe of pre-industrial societies that still exist, a detailed learning of plants and their properties must be extremely ancient. This is logical. Plants are the basis of the food pyramid for all living things, even for other plants. They have always been enormously important to the welfare of peoples, not only for food, but also for clothing, weapons, tools, dyes, medicines, shelter, and a great many other purposes. Tribes living today in the jungles of the Amazon recognize literally hundreds of plants and know many properties of each. To them botany, as such, has no name and is probab-ly not even recognized as a special branch of "knowledge" at all. Unfortunately, the more industrialized we become, the farther away we move from direct contact with plants, and the less distinct our knowledge of botany grows. Yet everyone comes unconsciously on an amazing amount of botanical knowledge, and few people will fail to recognize a rose, an apple, or an orchid. When our Neolithic ancestors, living in the Middle East about 10,000 years age, discovered that certain grasses could be harvested and their seeds planted for richer yields the next season, the first great step in a new association of plants and humans was taken. Grains were discovered and from them flowed the marvel of agriculture: cultivated crops. From then on, humans would increasingly take their living from the controlled production of a few plants, rather than getting a little here and a little there from many varie-ties that grew wild and the accumulated knowledge of tens of thousands of years of experience and intimacy with plants in the wild would begin to fade away.

单选题Paragraph 4______

单选题Do you {{U}}follow{{/U}} what I am saying? A.change B.investigate C.write D.understand

单选题The new teacher gave us a rather boring lesson.A. strangeB. specialC. quietD. dull

单选题Genera has increased the number of its employees recently．

单选题The dentist has decided to extract her bad tooth.

单选题The Smog (烟雾) For over a month, Indonesia was in crisis. Forest fires raged out of control as the country suffered its worst drought for 50 years. Smoke from the fires mixed with sunlight and hot dry air to form a cloud of smog. This pollution quickly spread and within days it was hanging over neighbouring countries including Malaysia, Singapore and Thailand. When the smoke combined with pollution from factories and cars, it soon became poisonous (有毒的). Dangerous amounts of CO became trapped under the smog and pollution levels rose. People wheezed (喘息) and coughed as they left the house and their eyes watered immediately. The smog made it impossible to see across streets and whole cities disappeared as grey soot (烟灰) covered everything. In some areas, water was hosed (用胶管浇) from high-rise city buildings to try and break up the smog. Finally, heavy rains, which came in November, put out the fires and cleared the air. But the environmental costs and health problems will remain. Many people from South- Eastern Asian cities already suffer from breathing huge amounts of car exhaust fumes (汽车排放的废气) and factory pollution. Breathing problems could well increase and many non-sufferers may have difficulties for the first time. Wildlife has suffered too. In lowland forests, elephants, deer, and tigers have been driven out of their homes by smog. But smog is not just an Asian problem. In fact, the word was first used in London in 1905 to describe the mixture of smoke and thick fog. Fog often hung over the capital. Sometimes the smog was so thick and poisonous that people were killed by breathing problems or in accidents. About 4, 000 Londoners died within five days as a result of thick smog in 1952.

单选题Mobile Phones: Change Our Life In the case of mobile phones, change is everything. Recent research indicates that the mobile phone is changing not only our culture, but our very bodies as well. First, let"s talk about culture. The difference between the mobile phone and its parent—the fixed-line phone, is that a mobile phone corresponds to a person, while a landline goes to a place. If you call my mobile, you get me. If you call my fixed-line phone, you get whoever answers it. This has several implications (含义). The most common one, however, and perhaps the thing that has changed our culture forever, is the "meeting" influence. People no longer need to make firm plans about when and where to meet. Twenty years ago, a Friday night would need to be arranged in advance. You needed enough time to allow everyone to get from their place of work to the first meeting place. Now, however, a night out can be arranged on the run. It is no longer "see you there at 8", but "text me around 8 and we"ll see where we all are". Texting changes people as well. In their paper, "Insights into the Social and Psychological Effects of SMS (Short Message Service) Text Messaging", two British researchers distinguished between two types of mobile phone users: the "talkers" and the "texters"—those who prefer voice to text messages and those who prefer text messages to voice. They found that the mobile phone"s individuality and privacy gave texters the ability to express a whole new outer personality. Texters were likely to report that their family would be surprised if they were to read their texts. This suggests that texting allowed texters to present a self-image that differed from the one familiar to those who knew them well. Another scientist wrote of the changes that mobiles have brought to body language. There are two kinds that people use while speaking on the phone. There is the "speakeasy": the head is held high, in a self-confident way, chatting away. And there is the "spacemaker": these people focus on themselves and keep out other people. Who can blame them? Phone meetings get cancelled or reformed and camera-phones intrude (侵入) on people"s privacy. So, it is understandable if your mobile makes you nervous. But perhaps you needn"t worry so much. After all, it is good to talk.

单选题I think ￡7 a drink is a bit Usteep/U, don’t you?

单选题The curious look from the strangers around her made her feel Uuneasy/U.

单选题I Umeant/U to give you this book today, but I forgot.

单选题Use of Trademarks A company must determine whether or not to apply for trademark protection under the federal Lanham Act of 1946 or state law. A trademark gives a firm exclusive use of a "word, symbol, combination of letters or numbers, or other devices such as distinctive packaging used to identify the goods of one company and to distinguish them from other companies" for as long as they are marketed. Trademarks are voluntary and require a registration procedure that can be time consuming, complex, and expensive. A multinational firm must register trademarks in every country in which it operates. In order for a trademark to be legally protected, it must have a distinctive meaning that does not describe an entire product category, not be confusingly similar to other trademarks, be used in interstate commerce, and not imply characteristics that the product does not possess. A surname by itself cannot be registered, because anyone can do business under his or her name. However, a surname can be registered if used to describe a specific business (e. g., Roy Rogers Restaurants). When brands become too popular or descriptive of a product category, they run the risk of becoming public property. Then a firm loses its trademark position. Brands that are fighting to remain exclusive trademarks include Xerox, Levis Frigidaire, Formica, Kleenex, and Teflon. Brands of former trademarks that are now considered generic and therefore public property are cellophane (赛璐芬), aspirin, kerosene (煤油), cola, linoleum (漆布), and monopoly. DuPont used careful research to retain a trademark for Teflon. As company survey showed that 68 percent of the consumers questioned identified Teflon as a brand name. This enabled DuPont to win a court case against a Japanese firm using the name Teflon. On the other hand, the US Supreme Court ruled that "Monopoly" was a generic term that could be used by any game maker. Likewise, a federal court ruled that Miller could not trademark the single word Lite for its lower calorie (低热量) beer. Trademark protection is essential to many firms because exclusive use of brands and symbols enables them to maintain long established images and market shares.

单选题The company has the right to end his employment at any time.

单选题Several people were missing during the storm．

单选题Although the working mother is very busy she still devotes a lot of time to her children.

单选题{{B}}第二篇{{/B}} {{B}}IQ-gene{{/B}} In the angry debate over how much of IQ comes from the genes that children inherit from parents and how much comes from experiences, one little fact gets overlooked: no one has identified any genes (other than those that cause retardation) that affect intelligence. So researchers led by Robert Plomin of London's Institute of Psychiatry decided to look for some. They figured that if you want to find a "smart gene" you should look in smart kids. They therefore examined the DNA of students like those who are so bright that they take college entrance exams four years early — and still score at Princeton—caliber levels. The scientists found what they sought. "We have," says Plomin, "the first specific gene ever associated with general intelligence." Plomin's colleagues drew blood from two groups of 51 children each, all 6 to 15 years old and living in six counties around Cleveland. In one group, the average IQ is 103. All the children are white. Isolating the blood cells, the researchers then examined each child's chromosome 6 of the 37landmarks on chromosome 6 that the researchers looked for, one jumped out: a form of gene called IGF2R occurred in twice as many children in the high-IQ group as in the average group — 32 percent versus 16 percent. The study, in the May issue of the journal Psychological Science, concludes that it is this form of the IGF2R gene that contributes to intelligence. Some geneticists see major problems with the IQ-gene study. One is the possibility that Plomin's group fell for "chopsticks fallacy". Geneticists might think they've found a gene for chopsticks flexibility. But all they've really found is a gene more common m Asians than, say, Africans. Similarly, Plomin's IQ gene might simply be one that is more common in groups mat emphasize academic achievement." What is the gene that they've found reflects ethnicity?" asks geneticist Andrew Feinberg of Johns Hopkins University. "That alone might explain the link to intelligence, since IQ tests are known for being culturally sensitive and affected by a child's environment." And Neil Risch of Stand ford University points out that if you look for 37 genes on a chromosome, as the researchers did, and find that one is more common in smarter kids, that might reflect pure chance rather than a causal link between the gene and Intelligence. Warns Feinberg, "I would take these findings with a whole box of salt."

单选题One thing that managers do not have to understand is how computers work.

单选题At that time, we did not fully grasp the significance of what had happened.

单选题If you had gone over your test paper carefully before handing it in, you would have made fewer mistakes.

单选题She found me very dull .