input question: Given the background: In addition to insects, weeds have also been a menace to farmers - just ask anyone with a garden how much they hate weeds. They can quickly compete for water and nutrients needed by other plants. Sure, farmers can use herbicides to kill weeds, but do these chemicals also harm the crops? Can biotechnology help with this issue? Some crops have also been genetically engineered to acquire tolerance to the herbicides - allowing the crops to grow, but killing the weeds. But the lack of cost effective herbicides with a broad range of activity - that do not harm crops - is a problem in weed management. Multiple applications of numerous herbicides are routinely needed to control the wide range of weeds that are harmful to crops. And at times these herbicides are being used as a preventive measure that is, spraying to prevent weeds from developing rather than spraying after weeds form. So these chemicals are being added to crops. This practice is followed by mechanical and/or hand weeding to control weeds that are not controlled by the chemicals. Crops that are tolerant of herbicides would obviously be a tremendous benefit to farmers ( Figure above ). The introduction of herbicide tolerant crops has the potential to reduce the number of chemicals needed during a growing season, thereby increasing crop yield due to improved weed management and decreased harm to the crops. and the situation: Because of the weed and insect menace villagers from North village decided to use herbicide tolerant crops. South village decided to postpone a decision and kept using regular seeds. Answer the following question: Which village didn't decrease harm to the crops????
output answer: South

input question: Given the background: Sand mining is a direct cause of erosion, and impacts the local wildlife.[2] Various animals depend on sandy beaches for nesting clutches, and mining has led to the near extinction of gharials (a species of crocodile) in India. Disturbance of underwater and coastal sand causes turbidity in the water, which is harmful for organisms like coral that need sunlight. It can also destroy fisheries, financially harming their operators. Removal of physical coastal barriers, such as dunes, sometimes leads to flooding of beachside communities, and the destruction of picturesque beaches causes tourism to dissipate. Sand mining is regulated by law in many places, but is often done illegally.[3] Globally, it is a $70 billion industry, with sand selling at up to $90 per cubic yard.[4] and the situation: The island of Utopia is a popular tourist destination with its great sandy beaches. Two of the most popular beaches are beach A and beach B. Both beaches also have large wildlife sanctuaries where rare dolphins can be seen. There are some fisheries in both beaches too. This year the government of Utopia is looking for more sources to increase their revenue. They decided to allow sand mining in beach A next year, and earn some extra revenue. Answer the following question: Which beachside comminity might get flooding next year, beach A or beach B????
output answer: beach A

input question: Given the background: About 10% of sedimentary rocks are limestones. The solubility of limestone in water and weak acid solutions leads to karst landscapes, in which water erodes the limestone over thousands to millions of years. Most cave systems are through limestone bedrock. and the situation: White mountains are often visited by tourists because of the many beautiful caves, stalactites, stalagmites and karst phenomena. Dome mountains are interesting to tourists because they are very massive, of volcanic origin and excellent for climbing. Answer the following question: Which mountain has a higher percentage of limestone in its composition????
output answer: White

input question: Given the background: Unfortunately, the layer of good ozone is being destroyed by air pollution. The chief culprits are chlorine and bromine gases. They are released in aerosol sprays, coolants, and other products. Loss of ozone has created an ozone hole over Antarctica. Ozone depletion results in higher levels of UV radiation reaching Earth. In humans, this increases skin cancers and eye cataracts. It also disturbs the nitrogen cycle, kills plankton, and disrupts ocean food webs. The total loss of the ozone layer would be devastating to most life. Its rate of loss has slowed with restrictions on pollutants, but it is still at risk. and the situation: Russian research spent most of their time in Antarctica to study the loss of ozone in the atmosphere. The Canadian team went north of the Polar Circle, close to the North Pole to do the same thing. They spent several months there. Answer the following question: Which team was closer to the ozone hole in the atmosphere????
output answer:
Russian