The statement says, "If farmers want to improve their yield, they must use organic fertilizers in place of chemical fertilizers." On this basis, which of the following assumptions are implicit? I. Chemical fertilizers have certain ill effects on health. II. Chemical fertilizers do not produce as much yield as organic fertilizers.

Introduction / Context:
This statement and assumption question deals with agricultural practices and crop yield. The statement claims that farmers must use organic fertilizers instead of chemical fertilizers if they want to improve their yield. Assumptions relate to why organic fertilizers are recommended. We must decide whether concerns about health and relative yield are implied by the statement, or whether only one of them is necessary for the reasoning.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Statement: If farmers want to improve their yield, they must use organic fertilizers in place of chemical fertilizers.
• Assumption I: Chemical fertilizers have certain ill effects on health.
• Assumption II: Chemical fertilizers do not produce as much yield as organic fertilizers.
• The focus of the statement is on improving yield, not directly on health.

Concept / Approach:
The key idea is that the stated goal is higher yield, not health safety. The recommendation is based on the belief that changing from chemical to organic fertilizers will increase yield. That belief is captured in Assumption II. Whether chemical fertilizers have ill effects on health may be true in real life, but it is not used in the reasoning here, because the statement makes no mention of health; it only connects fertilizer choice to yield improvement. Therefore, Assumption I is not necessary for the statement to be meaningful, while Assumption II is central to the logic.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Focus on the main link: farmers want better yield, and the advice is to use organic instead of chemical fertilizers.Step 2: This link makes sense only if the speaker believes that organic fertilizers give better yield than chemical fertilizers.Step 3: That belief is exactly what Assumption II states and is therefore implicit.Step 4: Assumption I talks about ill effects of chemical fertilizers on health.Step 5: Health is not mentioned in the statement; the recommendation is purely about improving yield, so Assumption I is not required for the argument to work.

Verification / Alternative check:
If we deny Assumption II and say chemical fertilizers produce equal or higher yields than organic fertilizers, then the advice to switch in order to improve yield would be baseless.If we deny Assumption I and say chemical fertilizers have no ill effects on health, the statement, which is only about yield, remains logically consistent.Thus only Assumption II is necessary.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option A is wrong because health effects are not used as a reason in the statement; they are outside the scope of the given reasoning.Option C is wrong because Assumption I cannot replace Assumption II for the logic about yield.Option D is wrong because the argument does not depend on health concerns, only on comparative yields.

Common Pitfalls:
One frequent mistake is to bring in common knowledge that chemical fertilizers may harm health and treat it as part of the logic even when the statement does not mention health.Another pitfall is failing to identify the exact goal in the statement, which here is yield improvement, not environmental or health safety.

Final Answer:
Therefore only the second assumption is implicit in this recommendation, so the correct answer is If only assumption II is Implicit.