TOEFL Reading
Past Questions

1. Read the passage and answer the question. Color in Bird Feathers The brilliant colors of bird feathers arise from two fundamentally different mechanisms, and distinguishing between them has occupied biologists for over a century. The first mechanism is pigmentation. Certain molecules, deposited in the feather as it grows, absorb some wavelengths of light and reflect others. Melanins, for example, produce blacks, browns, and dull yellows, and they have the additional benefit of strengthening the feather against wear. Carotenoids, which birds cannot manufacture themselves and must instead obtain from their diet, yield the vivid reds and oranges seen in species such as the cardinal and the flamingo. The second mechanism, known as structural coloration, does not depend on pigment at all. Instead, microscopic structures within the feather scatter light in ways that amplify particular wavelengths. The blue of a blue jay, for instance, is not produced by any blue pigment — indeed, no bird is known to manufacture a blue pigment. Rather, tiny air pockets and protein arrangements scatter short-wavelength blue light back to the observer while allowing other wavelengths to pass through or be absorbed by underlying melanin. This is why a blue feather, when crushed so that its internal structure is destroyed, loses its color entirely, whereas a crushed red feather retains its hue. The interplay of the two mechanisms can produce effects that neither could achieve alone. Iridescence — the shifting, metallic sheen of a hummingbird's throat or a peacock's tail — results when structural elements are layered so precisely that the color appears to change with the angle of view. Green, surprisingly, is rarely a pigment in birds; it usually emerges from the combination of structural blue with a yellow carotenoid layer. The evolutionary advantages of such displays remain debated, but most researchers agree they play a central role in attracting mates and signaling fitness. ────────── The word "yield" in paragraph 1 is closest in meaning to

• A. absorb
• B. produce
• C. require
• D. replace

Answer: B

2. Read the passage and answer the question. Color in Bird Feathers The brilliant colors of bird feathers arise from two fundamentally different mechanisms, and distinguishing between them has occupied biologists for over a century. The first mechanism is pigmentation. Certain molecules, deposited in the feather as it grows, absorb some wavelengths of light and reflect others. Melanins, for example, produce blacks, browns, and dull yellows, and they have the additional benefit of strengthening the feather against wear. Carotenoids, which birds cannot manufacture themselves and must instead obtain from their diet, yield the vivid reds and oranges seen in species such as the cardinal and the flamingo. The second mechanism, known as structural coloration, does not depend on pigment at all. Instead, microscopic structures within the feather scatter light in ways that amplify particular wavelengths. The blue of a blue jay, for instance, is not produced by any blue pigment — indeed, no bird is known to manufacture a blue pigment. Rather, tiny air pockets and protein arrangements scatter short-wavelength blue light back to the observer while allowing other wavelengths to pass through or be absorbed by underlying melanin. This is why a blue feather, when crushed so that its internal structure is destroyed, loses its color entirely, whereas a crushed red feather retains its hue. The interplay of the two mechanisms can produce effects that neither could achieve alone. Iridescence — the shifting, metallic sheen of a hummingbird's throat or a peacock's tail — results when structural elements are layered so precisely that the color appears to change with the angle of view. Green, surprisingly, is rarely a pigment in birds; it usually emerges from the combination of structural blue with a yellow carotenoid layer. The evolutionary advantages of such displays remain debated, but most researchers agree they play a central role in attracting mates and signaling fitness. ────────── According to paragraph 1, carotenoids differ from melanins in that carotenoids

• A. strengthen the feather against wear
• B. cannot be produced by the bird itself
• C. produce black and brown colors
• D. are destroyed when the feather is crushed

Answer: B

3. Read the passage and answer the question. Color in Bird Feathers The brilliant colors of bird feathers arise from two fundamentally different mechanisms, and distinguishing between them has occupied biologists for over a century. The first mechanism is pigmentation. Certain molecules, deposited in the feather as it grows, absorb some wavelengths of light and reflect others. Melanins, for example, produce blacks, browns, and dull yellows, and they have the additional benefit of strengthening the feather against wear. Carotenoids, which birds cannot manufacture themselves and must instead obtain from their diet, yield the vivid reds and oranges seen in species such as the cardinal and the flamingo. The second mechanism, known as structural coloration, does not depend on pigment at all. Instead, microscopic structures within the feather scatter light in ways that amplify particular wavelengths. The blue of a blue jay, for instance, is not produced by any blue pigment — indeed, no bird is known to manufacture a blue pigment. Rather, tiny air pockets and protein arrangements scatter short-wavelength blue light back to the observer while allowing other wavelengths to pass through or be absorbed by underlying melanin. This is why a blue feather, when crushed so that its internal structure is destroyed, loses its color entirely, whereas a crushed red feather retains its hue. The interplay of the two mechanisms can produce effects that neither could achieve alone. Iridescence — the shifting, metallic sheen of a hummingbird's throat or a peacock's tail — results when structural elements are layered so precisely that the color appears to change with the angle of view. Green, surprisingly, is rarely a pigment in birds; it usually emerges from the combination of structural blue with a yellow carotenoid layer. The evolutionary advantages of such displays remain debated, but most researchers agree they play a central role in attracting mates and signaling fitness. ────────── According to the passage, what happens when a blue feather is crushed?

• A. It turns red
• B. It becomes iridescent
• C. It loses its color
• D. Its melanin is released

Answer: C

4. Read the passage and answer the question. Color in Bird Feathers The brilliant colors of bird feathers arise from two fundamentally different mechanisms, and distinguishing between them has occupied biologists for over a century. The first mechanism is pigmentation. Certain molecules, deposited in the feather as it grows, absorb some wavelengths of light and reflect others. Melanins, for example, produce blacks, browns, and dull yellows, and they have the additional benefit of strengthening the feather against wear. Carotenoids, which birds cannot manufacture themselves and must instead obtain from their diet, yield the vivid reds and oranges seen in species such as the cardinal and the flamingo. The second mechanism, known as structural coloration, does not depend on pigment at all. Instead, microscopic structures within the feather scatter light in ways that amplify particular wavelengths. The blue of a blue jay, for instance, is not produced by any blue pigment — indeed, no bird is known to manufacture a blue pigment. Rather, tiny air pockets and protein arrangements scatter short-wavelength blue light back to the observer while allowing other wavelengths to pass through or be absorbed by underlying melanin. This is why a blue feather, when crushed so that its internal structure is destroyed, loses its color entirely, whereas a crushed red feather retains its hue. The interplay of the two mechanisms can produce effects that neither could achieve alone. Iridescence — the shifting, metallic sheen of a hummingbird's throat or a peacock's tail — results when structural elements are layered so precisely that the color appears to change with the angle of view. Green, surprisingly, is rarely a pigment in birds; it usually emerges from the combination of structural blue with a yellow carotenoid layer. The evolutionary advantages of such displays remain debated, but most researchers agree they play a central role in attracting mates and signaling fitness. ────────── According to the passage, all of the following can be produced by pigmentation EXCEPT

• A. brown
• B. red
• C. blue
• D. orange

Answer: C

5. Read the passage and answer the question. Color in Bird Feathers The brilliant colors of bird feathers arise from two fundamentally different mechanisms, and distinguishing between them has occupied biologists for over a century. The first mechanism is pigmentation. Certain molecules, deposited in the feather as it grows, absorb some wavelengths of light and reflect others. Melanins, for example, produce blacks, browns, and dull yellows, and they have the additional benefit of strengthening the feather against wear. Carotenoids, which birds cannot manufacture themselves and must instead obtain from their diet, yield the vivid reds and oranges seen in species such as the cardinal and the flamingo. The second mechanism, known as structural coloration, does not depend on pigment at all. Instead, microscopic structures within the feather scatter light in ways that amplify particular wavelengths. The blue of a blue jay, for instance, is not produced by any blue pigment — indeed, no bird is known to manufacture a blue pigment. Rather, tiny air pockets and protein arrangements scatter short-wavelength blue light back to the observer while allowing other wavelengths to pass through or be absorbed by underlying melanin. This is why a blue feather, when crushed so that its internal structure is destroyed, loses its color entirely, whereas a crushed red feather retains its hue. The interplay of the two mechanisms can produce effects that neither could achieve alone. Iridescence — the shifting, metallic sheen of a hummingbird's throat or a peacock's tail — results when structural elements are layered so precisely that the color appears to change with the angle of view. Green, surprisingly, is rarely a pigment in birds; it usually emerges from the combination of structural blue with a yellow carotenoid layer. The evolutionary advantages of such displays remain debated, but most researchers agree they play a central role in attracting mates and signaling fitness. ────────── It can be inferred from paragraph 2 that a red feather, if crushed, would

• A. lose its color
• B. retain its color
• C. turn blue
• D. become iridescent

Answer: B

6. Read the passage and answer the question. Color in Bird Feathers The brilliant colors of bird feathers arise from two fundamentally different mechanisms, and distinguishing between them has occupied biologists for over a century. The first mechanism is pigmentation. Certain molecules, deposited in the feather as it grows, absorb some wavelengths of light and reflect others. Melanins, for example, produce blacks, browns, and dull yellows, and they have the additional benefit of strengthening the feather against wear. Carotenoids, which birds cannot manufacture themselves and must instead obtain from their diet, yield the vivid reds and oranges seen in species such as the cardinal and the flamingo. The second mechanism, known as structural coloration, does not depend on pigment at all. Instead, microscopic structures within the feather scatter light in ways that amplify particular wavelengths. The blue of a blue jay, for instance, is not produced by any blue pigment — indeed, no bird is known to manufacture a blue pigment. Rather, tiny air pockets and protein arrangements scatter short-wavelength blue light back to the observer while allowing other wavelengths to pass through or be absorbed by underlying melanin. This is why a blue feather, when crushed so that its internal structure is destroyed, loses its color entirely, whereas a crushed red feather retains its hue. The interplay of the two mechanisms can produce effects that neither could achieve alone. Iridescence — the shifting, metallic sheen of a hummingbird's throat or a peacock's tail — results when structural elements are layered so precisely that the color appears to change with the angle of view. Green, surprisingly, is rarely a pigment in birds; it usually emerges from the combination of structural blue with a yellow carotenoid layer. The evolutionary advantages of such displays remain debated, but most researchers agree they play a central role in attracting mates and signaling fitness. ────────── Why does the author mention crushing a feather in paragraph 2?

• A. to suggest a method for identifying bird species
• B. to illustrate the difference between structural and pigment color
• C. to explain how melanin strengthens feathers
• D. to describe how iridescence is produced

Answer: B

7. Read the passage and answer the question. Color in Bird Feathers The brilliant colors of bird feathers arise from two fundamentally different mechanisms, and distinguishing between them has occupied biologists for over a century. The first mechanism is pigmentation. Certain molecules, deposited in the feather as it grows, absorb some wavelengths of light and reflect others. Melanins, for example, produce blacks, browns, and dull yellows, and they have the additional benefit of strengthening the feather against wear. Carotenoids, which birds cannot manufacture themselves and must instead obtain from their diet, yield the vivid reds and oranges seen in species such as the cardinal and the flamingo. The second mechanism, known as structural coloration, does not depend on pigment at all. Instead, microscopic structures within the feather scatter light in ways that amplify particular wavelengths. The blue of a blue jay, for instance, is not produced by any blue pigment — indeed, no bird is known to manufacture a blue pigment. Rather, tiny air pockets and protein arrangements scatter short-wavelength blue light back to the observer while allowing other wavelengths to pass through or be absorbed by underlying melanin. This is why a blue feather, when crushed so that its internal structure is destroyed, loses its color entirely, whereas a crushed red feather retains its hue. The interplay of the two mechanisms can produce effects that neither could achieve alone. Iridescence — the shifting, metallic sheen of a hummingbird's throat or a peacock's tail — results when structural elements are layered so precisely that the color appears to change with the angle of view. Green, surprisingly, is rarely a pigment in birds; it usually emerges from the combination of structural blue with a yellow carotenoid layer. The evolutionary advantages of such displays remain debated, but most researchers agree they play a central role in attracting mates and signaling fitness. ────────── According to paragraph 3, the green coloration of birds usually results from

• A. a green pigment in the feather
• B. iridescent structures acting alone
• C. structural blue combined with a yellow pigment
• D. melanin combined with carotenoids

Answer: C

8. Read the passage and answer the question. The Emergence of the First Cities For most of human history, people lived in small, mobile groups that subsisted by hunting animals and gathering wild plants. The appearance of the first cities, beginning around 5,500 years ago in the river valleys of the Near East, therefore represents one of the most profound transformations in the human story. Yet the question of why cities arose has no simple answer, and scholars continue to weigh several competing explanations. The most widely cited factor is the surplus made possible by agriculture. Once farmers in fertile regions such as Mesopotamia could grow more grain than they immediately needed, that surplus could feed people who did not farm at all — potters, weavers, priests, and administrators. Specialization of labor followed, and with it the dense, interdependent populations that define urban life. Critics of this view point out, however, that surplus alone does not compel people to gather in cities; many agricultural societies produced surpluses for centuries without urbanizing. A second explanation emphasizes the role of trade. Cities frequently arose at points where goods naturally changed hands — river junctions, mountain passes, and coastlines. Such locations attracted merchants and the artisans who served them, and the wealth generated by exchange could support large settlements even in areas with limited farmland. A third view stresses administration and defense: as populations grew, the need to coordinate irrigation, store grain, resolve disputes, and protect against raiders may have drawn people together under centralized authority, often expressed through monumental temples and walls. These explanations are not mutually exclusive. Most archaeologists now suspect that the earliest cities emerged from a combination of pressures that varied from place to place. What seems clear is that once established, cities became engines of innovation, concentrating people and ideas in a way that accelerated the development of writing, mathematics, and law. ────────── The word "profound" in paragraph 1 is closest in meaning to

• A. gradual
• B. far-reaching
• C. recent
• D. uncertain

Answer: B

9. Read the passage and answer the question. The Emergence of the First Cities For most of human history, people lived in small, mobile groups that subsisted by hunting animals and gathering wild plants. The appearance of the first cities, beginning around 5,500 years ago in the river valleys of the Near East, therefore represents one of the most profound transformations in the human story. Yet the question of why cities arose has no simple answer, and scholars continue to weigh several competing explanations. The most widely cited factor is the surplus made possible by agriculture. Once farmers in fertile regions such as Mesopotamia could grow more grain than they immediately needed, that surplus could feed people who did not farm at all — potters, weavers, priests, and administrators. Specialization of labor followed, and with it the dense, interdependent populations that define urban life. Critics of this view point out, however, that surplus alone does not compel people to gather in cities; many agricultural societies produced surpluses for centuries without urbanizing. A second explanation emphasizes the role of trade. Cities frequently arose at points where goods naturally changed hands — river junctions, mountain passes, and coastlines. Such locations attracted merchants and the artisans who served them, and the wealth generated by exchange could support large settlements even in areas with limited farmland. A third view stresses administration and defense: as populations grew, the need to coordinate irrigation, store grain, resolve disputes, and protect against raiders may have drawn people together under centralized authority, often expressed through monumental temples and walls. These explanations are not mutually exclusive. Most archaeologists now suspect that the earliest cities emerged from a combination of pressures that varied from place to place. What seems clear is that once established, cities became engines of innovation, concentrating people and ideas in a way that accelerated the development of writing, mathematics, and law. ────────── According to paragraph 2, an agricultural surplus contributed to the rise of cities by

• A. forcing farmers to leave the countryside
• B. making trade unnecessary
• C. allowing some people to do work other than farming
• D. reducing the overall population

Answer: C

10. Read the passage and answer the question. The Emergence of the First Cities For most of human history, people lived in small, mobile groups that subsisted by hunting animals and gathering wild plants. The appearance of the first cities, beginning around 5,500 years ago in the river valleys of the Near East, therefore represents one of the most profound transformations in the human story. Yet the question of why cities arose has no simple answer, and scholars continue to weigh several competing explanations. The most widely cited factor is the surplus made possible by agriculture. Once farmers in fertile regions such as Mesopotamia could grow more grain than they immediately needed, that surplus could feed people who did not farm at all — potters, weavers, priests, and administrators. Specialization of labor followed, and with it the dense, interdependent populations that define urban life. Critics of this view point out, however, that surplus alone does not compel people to gather in cities; many agricultural societies produced surpluses for centuries without urbanizing. A second explanation emphasizes the role of trade. Cities frequently arose at points where goods naturally changed hands — river junctions, mountain passes, and coastlines. Such locations attracted merchants and the artisans who served them, and the wealth generated by exchange could support large settlements even in areas with limited farmland. A third view stresses administration and defense: as populations grew, the need to coordinate irrigation, store grain, resolve disputes, and protect against raiders may have drawn people together under centralized authority, often expressed through monumental temples and walls. These explanations are not mutually exclusive. Most archaeologists now suspect that the earliest cities emerged from a combination of pressures that varied from place to place. What seems clear is that once established, cities became engines of innovation, concentrating people and ideas in a way that accelerated the development of writing, mathematics, and law. ────────── According to paragraph 2, critics of the surplus explanation argue that

• A. agricultural surpluses were extremely rare
• B. surplus by itself does not force people to live in cities
• C. agriculture did not actually produce surpluses
• D. cities appeared before agriculture began

Answer: B

11. Read the passage and answer the question. The Emergence of the First Cities For most of human history, people lived in small, mobile groups that subsisted by hunting animals and gathering wild plants. The appearance of the first cities, beginning around 5,500 years ago in the river valleys of the Near East, therefore represents one of the most profound transformations in the human story. Yet the question of why cities arose has no simple answer, and scholars continue to weigh several competing explanations. The most widely cited factor is the surplus made possible by agriculture. Once farmers in fertile regions such as Mesopotamia could grow more grain than they immediately needed, that surplus could feed people who did not farm at all — potters, weavers, priests, and administrators. Specialization of labor followed, and with it the dense, interdependent populations that define urban life. Critics of this view point out, however, that surplus alone does not compel people to gather in cities; many agricultural societies produced surpluses for centuries without urbanizing. A second explanation emphasizes the role of trade. Cities frequently arose at points where goods naturally changed hands — river junctions, mountain passes, and coastlines. Such locations attracted merchants and the artisans who served them, and the wealth generated by exchange could support large settlements even in areas with limited farmland. A third view stresses administration and defense: as populations grew, the need to coordinate irrigation, store grain, resolve disputes, and protect against raiders may have drawn people together under centralized authority, often expressed through monumental temples and walls. These explanations are not mutually exclusive. Most archaeologists now suspect that the earliest cities emerged from a combination of pressures that varied from place to place. What seems clear is that once established, cities became engines of innovation, concentrating people and ideas in a way that accelerated the development of writing, mathematics, and law. ────────── According to paragraph 3, cities often arose at river junctions and mountain passes because these locations

• A. had the most fertile farmland
• B. were the easiest places to defend
• C. were where goods naturally changed hands
• D. already had the largest populations

Answer: C

12. Read the passage and answer the question. The Emergence of the First Cities For most of human history, people lived in small, mobile groups that subsisted by hunting animals and gathering wild plants. The appearance of the first cities, beginning around 5,500 years ago in the river valleys of the Near East, therefore represents one of the most profound transformations in the human story. Yet the question of why cities arose has no simple answer, and scholars continue to weigh several competing explanations. The most widely cited factor is the surplus made possible by agriculture. Once farmers in fertile regions such as Mesopotamia could grow more grain than they immediately needed, that surplus could feed people who did not farm at all — potters, weavers, priests, and administrators. Specialization of labor followed, and with it the dense, interdependent populations that define urban life. Critics of this view point out, however, that surplus alone does not compel people to gather in cities; many agricultural societies produced surpluses for centuries without urbanizing. A second explanation emphasizes the role of trade. Cities frequently arose at points where goods naturally changed hands — river junctions, mountain passes, and coastlines. Such locations attracted merchants and the artisans who served them, and the wealth generated by exchange could support large settlements even in areas with limited farmland. A third view stresses administration and defense: as populations grew, the need to coordinate irrigation, store grain, resolve disputes, and protect against raiders may have drawn people together under centralized authority, often expressed through monumental temples and walls. These explanations are not mutually exclusive. Most archaeologists now suspect that the earliest cities emerged from a combination of pressures that varied from place to place. What seems clear is that once established, cities became engines of innovation, concentrating people and ideas in a way that accelerated the development of writing, mathematics, and law. ────────── Why does the author mention "monumental temples and walls" in paragraph 3?

• A. to give examples of centralized authority and defense
• B. to argue that religion was the main cause of cities
• C. to describe the trade routes between early cities
• D. to explain how agricultural surplus was stored

Answer: A

13. Read the passage and answer the question. The Emergence of the First Cities For most of human history, people lived in small, mobile groups that subsisted by hunting animals and gathering wild plants. The appearance of the first cities, beginning around 5,500 years ago in the river valleys of the Near East, therefore represents one of the most profound transformations in the human story. Yet the question of why cities arose has no simple answer, and scholars continue to weigh several competing explanations. The most widely cited factor is the surplus made possible by agriculture. Once farmers in fertile regions such as Mesopotamia could grow more grain than they immediately needed, that surplus could feed people who did not farm at all — potters, weavers, priests, and administrators. Specialization of labor followed, and with it the dense, interdependent populations that define urban life. Critics of this view point out, however, that surplus alone does not compel people to gather in cities; many agricultural societies produced surpluses for centuries without urbanizing. A second explanation emphasizes the role of trade. Cities frequently arose at points where goods naturally changed hands — river junctions, mountain passes, and coastlines. Such locations attracted merchants and the artisans who served them, and the wealth generated by exchange could support large settlements even in areas with limited farmland. A third view stresses administration and defense: as populations grew, the need to coordinate irrigation, store grain, resolve disputes, and protect against raiders may have drawn people together under centralized authority, often expressed through monumental temples and walls. These explanations are not mutually exclusive. Most archaeologists now suspect that the earliest cities emerged from a combination of pressures that varied from place to place. What seems clear is that once established, cities became engines of innovation, concentrating people and ideas in a way that accelerated the development of writing, mathematics, and law. ────────── Which statement best reflects the view of most archaeologists, as described in the passage?

• A. Trade was the single cause of urbanization.
• B. Cities arose from one identical cause everywhere.
• C. Several factors, varying by place, contributed to the rise of cities.
• D. Cities had little effect on later innovation.

Answer: C