『新东方在线托福听力』为托福考生准备了ETS托福TPO/Official 37 Passage 2阅读练习，TPO/Official 37 Passage 2原文答案解析，TPO/Official 37 Passage 2阅读原文练习音频翻译。

托福TPO/Official 37 Passage 2阅读原文题目答案及解析-新东方托福官方网校手机版

自然资源保护主义者将单个动物或整个物种从一个地方转移到另一个地方，这变得越来越普遍。

It is becoming increasingly common for conservationists to move individual animals or entire species from one site to another.

这可能是为了建立一个新的种群，其中同种群（属于同一物种的动物或植物）已经灭绝，或者是在现有种群中增加个体。

This may be either to establish a new population where a population of conspecifics (animals or plants belonging to the same species) has become extinct or to add individuals to an existing population.

前者称为再引入，后者称为强化。

The former is termed reintroduction and the latter reinforcement.

在这两种情况下，野生个体都是在一个地方被捕获，然后直接转移到另一个地方。

In both cases, wild individuals are captured in one location and translocated directly to another.

直接迁移已被广泛应用于各种植物和动物，而且早在保护成为一个熟悉的术语之前，它就作为一种食物来源，被用来维持种群数量。

Direct translocation has been used on a wide range of plants and animals and was carried out to maintain populations as a source of food long before conservation was a familiar term.

打着保护的旗号进行的迁移数量迅速增加，这导致了对这项措施的批评，因为缺乏对其功效的评价，也因为其潜在的缺点。

The number of translocations carried out under the banner of conservation has increased rapidly, and this has led to criticism of the technique because of the lack of evaluation of its efficacy and because of its potential disadvantages.

这种迁移的性质从高度有组织和研究经验的国家或国际项目，到有善意的动物爱好者特别释放获救动物。

The nature of translocation ranges from highly organized and researched national or international programs to ad hoc releases of rescued animals by well-intentioned animal lovers.

在一片支离破碎的环境中，许多种群和栖息环境互相隔离，迁移可以在保护战略中发挥有效作用；它们可以增加现有种群的数量或增加小种群的规模、遗传多样性和人口平衡，从而增加其生存的机会。

In a fragmented landscape where many populations and habitats are isolated from others, translocations can play an effective role in conservation strategies; they can increase the number of existing populations or increase the size, genetic diversity, and demographic balance of a small population, consequently increasing its chances of survival.

很明显，迁移在物种恢复中起着重要的作用，而这些物种的数量已经大幅减少，这也是许多定居物种恢复其全部或部分活动范围的最有可能的方法。

Translocation clearly has a role in the recovery of species that have substantially declined and is the most likely method by which many sedentary species can recover all or part of their former range.

然而，与此相反的是，强化的迁移措施可能会将疾病从一个种群传播到另一个种群，或将有害或不适应的基因引入种群。

However, against this is the potential for reinforcement translocations to spread disease from one population to another or to introduce deleterious or maladaptive genes to a population.

此外，捕食者或竞争对手的迁移可能会对其他物种产生负面影响，导致整体多样性的丧失。

Additionally, translocation of predators or competitors may have negative impacts on other species, resulting in an overall loss of diversity.

最后但并非最不重要的考虑是，这类行动所需的努力和资源，需要有证据证明可能带来的好处。

Last but not least of these considerations is the effort and resources required in this type of action, which need to be justified by evidence of the likely benefits.

尽管发生了大量的迁移，但令人惊讶的是，几乎没有证据表明这些行动的有效性。

Despite the large number of translocations that have taken place, there is surprisingly little evidence of the efficacy of such actions.

这在一定程度上是因为许多迁移并不是严格地为了保护（种群）；它们既不是官方的，也不是合法的，更不用说它们的方法是科学的。

This is partly because many translocations have not been strictly for conservation; neither have they been official nor legal, let alone scientific in their approach.

成功的迁移不可避免地会被记录下来并引起注意，而失败的迁移可能根本就不会被记录下来。

Successful translocations inevitably get recorded and gain attention, whereas failures may never be recorded at all.

这使得对该方法的评价非常困难。

This makes appraisal of the method very difficult.

One key problem is a definition of success.

如果个体活过了第一周或一年，那么迁移算成功吗，还是需要繁殖几代才算呢？

Is translocation successful if the individuals survive the first week or a year, or do they need to reproduce for one or several generations?

无论答案是什么，显然需要一个总的框架，以确保任何迁移都是合理的，有现实的成功机会，并为了未来的努力而受到适当的监测和评价。

Whatever the answer, it is clear that a general framework is required to ensure that any translocation is justified, has a realistic chance of success, and will be properly monitored and evaluated for the benefit of future efforts.

一个明显的迁移成功的例子是受到威胁的塞舌尔莺（Seychelles warbler）。

An example of apparent translocation success involves the threatened Seychelles warbler.

这个物种曾经被限制在塞舌尔群岛的库金岛（Cousin Island）上，并减少到26个个体。

This species was once confined to Cousin Island, one of the Seychelles islands, and reduced to 26 individuals.

精心的栖息地管理使这一数字增加到300多只，但单个种群仍然容易受到当地灾难性事件的影响。

Careful habitat management increased this number to over 300 birds, but the single population remained vulnerable to local catastrophic events.

为了减少这种风险，决定将个体转移到附近的两个岛屿。

The decision was taken to translocate individuals to two nearby islands to reduce this risk.

这种转移发生在1988年和1990年，都产生了健康的繁殖种群。

The translocations took place in 1988 and 1990, and both have resulted in healthy breeding populations.

法属圭亚那的红吼猴似乎也成功地进行了迁移实验。

A successful translocation exercise also appears to have been achieved with red howler monkeys in French Guiana.

一群吼猴被从一个地方迁移出来，该地因为进行水力发电而被洪水淹没了。

A howler population was translocated from a site due to be flooded for hydroelectric power generation.

放生点是一个吼猴的物种密度由于狩猎而降低的地方。

The release site was an area where local hunting had reduced the density of the resident howler population.

放生的猴子被置于观察之下，并由无线电追踪16只雌性猴子。

Released troops of monkeys were kept under visual observation and followed by radio tracking of 16 females.

虽然这群猴子最初似乎经历了一些问题，导致他们分开了，但所有被追踪的雌性都恢复了正常的行为模式。

Although the troops appeared to undergo initial problems, causing them to split up, all the tracked females settled into normal behavioral patterns.

不幸的是，成功的故事常常与失败的故事相匹配。

Unfortunately, the success stories are at least matched by accounts of failure.

回顾两栖动物和爬行动物的迁移，研究人员C·肯尼斯·多德（C. Kenneth Dodd）和理查德·A·西格尔（Richard A. Siegel）得出结论，大多数项目作为保护技术并没有被证明成功，不应该把它们当作可接受的管理和缓解措施来提倡。

Reviewing translocation of amphibians and reptiles, researchers C.Kenneth Dodd and Richard A.Siegel concluded that most projects have not demonstrated success as conservation techniques and should not be advocated as though they were acceptable management and mitigation practices.

According to paragraph 1, what distinguishes reinforcement from reintroduction of animal species?

The word “efficacy” in the passage is closest in meaning to

Paragraph 2 indicates all of the following about species translocation EXCEPT:

The word “substantially” in the passage is closest in meaning to

Paragraph 3 answers all of the following questions about species translocation EXCEPT:

The word “appraisal” in the passage is closest in meaning to

The word “properly” in the passage is closest in meaning to

Which of the following can be inferred from paragraph 4 about translocation efforts?

All of the following are mentioned in paragraph 4 as reasons why it is difficult to determine whether translocations have been successful EXCEPT:

According to paragraph 5, why did conservationists decide to translocate the Seychelles warbler from Cousin Island to two other islands?

According to paragraph 5, why were the howler monkeys in French Guiana translocated?

In paragraph 6, the author mentions Dodd and Siegel’s review of the translocation of amphibians and reptiles in order to

Look at the four squares  that indicate where the following sentence could be added to the passage. This is not the only example of a large-scale translocation that had positive results.  Where would the sentence best fit? Click on a square  to add the sentence to the passage.

Directions: An introductory sentence for a brief summary of the passage is provided below. Complete the summary by selecting the THREE answer choices that express the most important ideas in the passage. Some sentences do not belong in the summary because they express ideas that are not presented in the passage or are minor ideas in the passage. This question is worth 2 points.

Direct Species Translocation It is becoming increasingly common for conservationists to move individual animals or entire species from one site to another. This may be either to establish a new population where a population of conspecifics (animals or plants belonging to the same species) has become extinct or to add individuals to an existing population. The former is termed reintroduction and the latter reinforcement. In both cases, wild individuals are captured in one location and translocated directly to another. Direct translocation has been used on a wide range of plants and animals and was carried out to maintain populations as a source of food long before conservation was a familiar term. The number of translocations carried out under the banner of conservation has increased rapidly, and this has led to criticism of the technique because of the lack of evaluation of its efficacy and because of its potential disadvantages. The nature of translocation ranges from highly organized and researched national or international programs to ad hoc releases of rescued animals by well-intentioned animal lovers. In a fragmented landscape where many populations and habitats are isolated from others, translocations can play an effective role in conservation strategies; they can increase the number of existing populations or increase the size, genetic diversity, and demographic balance of a small population, consequently increasing its chances of survival. Translocation clearly has a role in the recovery of species that have substantially declined and is the most likely method by which many sedentary species can recover all or part of their former range. However, against this is the potential for reinforcement translocations to spread disease from one population to another or to introduce deleterious or maladaptive genes to a population. Additionally, translocation of predators or competitors may have negative impacts on other species, resulting in an overall loss of diversity. Last but not least of these considerations is the effort and resources required in this type of action, which need to be justified by evidence of the likely benefits. Despite the large number of translocations that have taken place, there is surprisingly little evidence of the efficacy of such actions. This is partly because many translocations have not been strictly for conservation; neither have they been official nor legal, let alone scientific in their approach. Successful translocations inevitably get recorded and gain attention, whereas failures may never be recorded at all. This makes appraisal of the method very difficult. One key problem is a definition of success. Is translocation successful if the individuals survive the first week or a year, or do they need to reproduce for one or several generations? Whatever the answer, it is clear that a general framework is required to ensure that any translocation is justified, has a realistic chance of success, and will be properly monitored and evaluated for the benefit of future efforts. An example of apparent translocation success involves the threatened Seychelles warbler. This species was once confined to Cousin Island, one of the Seychelles islands, and reduced to 26 individuals. Careful habitat management increased this number to over 300 birds, but the single population remained vulnerable to local catastrophic events.  The decision was taken to translocate individuals to two nearby islands to reduce this risk.  The translocations took place in 1988 and 1990, and both have resulted in healthy breeding populations.  A successful translocation exercise also appears to have been achieved with red howler monkeys in French Guiana.  A howler population was translocated from a site due to be flooded for hydroelectric power generation. The release site was an area where local hunting had reduced the density of the resident howler population. Released troops of monkeys were kept under visual observation and followed by radio tracking of 16 females. Although the troops appeared to undergo initial problems, causing them to split up, all the tracked females settled into normal behavioral patterns. Unfortunately, the success stories are at least matched by accounts of failure. Reviewing translocation of amphibians and reptiles, researchers C. Kenneth Dodd and Richard A. Siegel concluded that most projects have not demonstrated success as conservation techniques and should not be advocated as though they were acceptable management and mitigation practices.