The thylacine, or Tasmanian tiger, was a shy, striped, meat-eating marsupial that hunted by scent. Dingoes probably wiped it out on the mainland about 3,000 years ago. In Tasmania, hunting, habitat loss and disease finished it off. Protection came far too late, and the last one died in Hobart Zoo in 1936.
The notes (1-5) run from the second paragraph to the fifth. TRUE / FALSE / NOT GIVEN (6-13) goes from the fifth paragraph to the end.
Note completion (ONE WORD ONLY)
Questions 1-5
How to attack this block: Watch the word forms: the diet gap needs an adjective (entirely ___ diet), and the rest are nouns. The sense it relied on when hunting, where the young lived, what the mainland evidence is, and what disappeared along with prey in Tasmania.
Question 1
Answer: carnivorousParagraph 2, second sentence
What kind of diet did the thylacine have?
In terms of feeding, it was exclusively carnivorous
Question says → Passage says
entirelyexclusively
dietIn terms of feeding
Why: 'Entirely' = 'exclusively'. The gap sits between 'an entirely' and 'diet', so it needs an adjective, and the passage gives you one: carnivorous.
The trap: 'Muscular' is the next adjective in the sentence, but it describes the stomach, not the diet. And don't write 'meat': the answer must come from the passage, so copy 'carnivorous' and check the spelling.
Question 2
Answer: scentParagraph 2, middle
What did the thylacine mostly rely on when it hunted?
During long-distance chases, thylacines were likely to have relied more on scent than any other sense.
Question says → Passage says
probably depended mainly onwere likely to have relied more on… than any other sense
when huntingDuring long-distance chases
Why: 'Probably' = 'likely', 'depended on' = 'relied on', and 'mainly' = 'more than any other sense'. The sense is scent.
The trap: The sentence before talks about exhausting prey in 'a long pursuit', so 'pursuit' or 'exhausting' might tempt you. Neither is something it depended on.
Question 3
Answer: pouchParagraph 3, middle
Where did the young spend their first months?
Newborns crawled into the pouch on the belly of their mother, and attached themselves to one of the four teats, remaining there for up to three months.
Question says → Passage says
youngNewborns
first months of life inside its mother'scrawled into the… on the belly of their mother… remaining there for up to three months
Why: The newborns lived in the pouch for up to three months. 'Inside its mother's ___' needs a place on the mother's body: pouch.
The trap: 'Lair' comes next, but that's where the young stayed after they were old enough to leave the pouch. 'Belly' and 'teats' are the wrong part too: they lived in the pouch.
Question 4
Answer: fossilParagraph 4, second sentence
What is the last evidence of the thylacine on mainland Australia?
The most recent, well-dated occurrence of a thylacine on the mainland is a carbon-dated fossil from Murray Cave in Western Australia, which is around 3,100 years old.
Question says → Passage says
last evidenceThe most recent, well-dated occurrence
3,100-year-oldaround 3,100 years old
Why: The note squeezes the sentence down: most recent evidence, 3,100 years old. The thing itself is a fossil. One word only, so leave out 'carbon-dated'.
The trap: 'Murray Cave' is where the fossil was found, not what it is. The note's 'a 3,100-year-old ___' needs an object.
Question 5
Answer: habitatParagraph 5, last sentence
Besides food sources, what was reduced and helped cause the decline in Tasmania?
loss of habitat along with the disappearance of prey species
Question says → Passage says
reduction inloss of
available sources of foodthe disappearance of prey species
Why: The note pairs two things just like the passage does. 'Disappearance of prey species' is the food part, so the other one, 'loss of ___', gives you habitat.
The trap: 'Disease' and 'competition with wild dogs' are in the same list, but they aren't things that got reduced. Only habitat fits 'reduction in'.
TRUE / FALSE / NOT GIVEN
Questions 6-13
How to attack this block: Check each FALSE carefully: only one thylacine was ever bred in captivity, scientists showed 'little' concern (Flynn was the exception), and the breeding-season protection came when the species was 'on the very edge of extinction'. The NOT GIVENs ask how biologists reacted to Gould, whether Flynn's island idea was practical, and how often searches happen now.
Question 6
Answer: TRUEParagraph 5, first sentence
Did humans kill large numbers of thylacines from the 1830s?
The dramatic decline of the thylacine in Tasmania, which began in the 1830s… is generally attributed to the relentless efforts of sheep farmers and bounty hunters with shotguns.
Question says → Passage says
killed by humanssheep farmers and bounty hunters with shotguns
Why: A dramatic decline from the 1830s blamed mainly on hunters with shotguns means a lot of thylacines were shot. The next sentence adds that this campaign 'played a large part'. TRUE.
The trap: The passage lists other causes too (disease, dogs, habitat loss), and that can make you doubt it. Other causes don't cancel out the killing.
Question 7
Answer: FALSEParagraph 6, first sentence
Were several thylacines born in zoos in the late 1800s?
There was only one successful attempt to breed a thylacine in captivity, at Melbourne Zoo in 1899.
Question says → Passage says
Several… were born in zoosonly one successful attempt to breed a thylacine in captivity
Why: 'Only one' contradicts 'several'. The date, 1899, is in the late 1800s, so the time fits but the number doesn't. FALSE.
The trap: 'Large numbers' went through London and Hobart zoos, which sounds like 'several'. Those animals passed through the zoos. They weren't born there.
Question 8
Answer: NOT GIVENParagraph 6, last sentence
Did Gould's prediction surprise some biologists?
The famous naturalist John Gould foresaw the thylacine's demise
Question says → Passage says
John Gould's predictionforesaw the thylacine's demise / would speedily diminish
Why: You learn what Gould predicted and when, but nothing about how biologists reacted to it. NOT GIVEN.
The trap: The next paragraph says scientists showed little concern about the decline. That's about the decline, not about Gould's prediction, and 'not concerned' isn't the same as 'surprised'.
Question 9
Answer: FALSEParagraph 7, first two sentences
Did many scientists in the early 1900s worry about the thylacine dying out?
nor was much concern expressed by scientists at the decline of this species in the decades that followed. A notable exception was T.T. Flynn
Question says → Passage says
many scientists became worriednor was much concern expressed by scientists
Why: Scientists showed little concern, and Flynn was 'a notable exception', so he was one of very few. 'Many scientists' contradicts that. FALSE.
The trap: Flynn was worried, in 1914, which is the early 1900s. One worried scientist isn't many, and 'exception' tells you he was unusual.
Question 10
Answer: NOT GIVENParagraph 7, third sentence
Did Flynn's idea of putting thylacines on an island turn out to be impractical?
he was sufficiently concerned about the scarcity of the thylacine to suggest that some should be captured and placed on a small island
Question says → Passage says
T.T. Flynn's proposalto suggest that some should be captured and placed on a small island
Why: You're told what Flynn suggested, but not whether anyone tried it or whether it would have worked. NOT GIVEN.
The trap: The next sentence starts 'But it was not until 1929…', which can make you think his idea was rejected as unworkable. It only says protection came much later.
Question 11
Answer: FALSEParagraph 7, fourth sentence
Were there still plenty of thylacines when the breeding-season protection law was passed?
But it was not until 1929, with the species on the very edge of extinction, that Tasmania's Animals and Birds Protection Board passed a motion protecting thylacines only for the month of December
Question says → Passage says
reasonable numbers… in existenceon the very edge of extinction
a piece of legislationpassed a motion
during their breeding seasonwhich was thought to be their prime breeding season
Why: In 1929 the species was 'on the very edge of extinction', so there were very few left, not reasonable numbers. FALSE.
The trap: It's easy to mix up the two laws. The 1936 protection came even later, but the statement is about the breeding-season one from 1929, and that was already too late.
Question 12
Answer: TRUEParagraph 7, last two sentences
Between 1930 and 1936, were all known living thylacines in captivity?
The last known wild thylacine to be killed was shot by a farmer in the north-east of Tasmania in 1930, leaving just captive specimens.
Question says → Passage says
the only known living thylacines were all in captivityleaving just captive specimens
From 1930 to 1936in 1930… died in Hobart Zoo on 7th September, 1936
Why: After the last wild one was shot in 1930, only captive ones were left, and the last of those died in Hobart Zoo in 1936. TRUE.
The trap: Some students hesitate because the 1930 thylacine was only the 'last known' wild one. The statement also says 'known', so the two match.
Question 13
Answer: NOT GIVENLast paragraph
Are searches for living thylacines rare nowadays?
There have been numerous expeditions and searches for the thylacine over the years
Question says → Passage says
Attempts to find living thylacinesexpeditions and searches for the thylacine
Why: 'Numerous… over the years' tells you about searches in total, not how often they happen now. NOT GIVEN.
The trap: 'Numerous' makes people choose FALSE. But the statement is about the present ('now'), and the passage gives no information about current frequency.
Loss of habitat is listed together with the disappearance of prey species, and the note pairs it with 'available sources of food'.
Words from this passage worth keeping
superficial resemblance(Paragraph 1)
looking similar only on the surface
distend(Paragraph 2)
swell or stretch outwards
nocturnal(Paragraph 2)
active at night
coincided(Paragraph 4)
happened at the same time
relentless(Paragraph 5)
never stopping or easing off
attributed to(Paragraph 5)
said to be caused by
demise(Paragraph 6)
end or death
scarcity(Paragraph 7)
being very few in number
Sit this test on Langujet, then come back
The full Cambridge 17 Test 3 reading paper: all three passages, 60 minutes, marked the second you finish with a review of every answer. Already done it? Take it again and see if the same traps still get you.
Cambridge IELTS 17, Test 3, Reading Passage 1. The passage and questions belong to Cambridge University Press and are not reproduced here. We quote short extracts only as evidence for our own commentary, and the answers are published for self-marking. Get the book for the full text, or sit the test on Langujet.
