Some fruits are vegetables and some vegetables are not edible; based on this, which of the given conclusions logically follows?

Introduction / Context:
This is a syllogism style reasoning question involving three sets: fruits, vegetables and edible items. You must analyse the statements and decide which of the two conclusions necessarily follows if the statements are taken as true.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Statement 1: Some fruits are vegetables.
• Statement 2: Some vegetables are not edible.
• Conclusion 1: Some fruits are not edible.
• Conclusion 2: Some vegetables are fruits.
• We consider only the logical content of the statements, not general world knowledge.

Concept / Approach:
The statement some fruits are vegetables means that there is at least one object that is both a fruit and a vegetable. The statement some vegetables are not edible tells us that within the set of vegetables there is at least one non edible element. We must check if these facts force either of the two conclusions in all possible diagrams consistent with the statements.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Interpret statement 1. Some fruits are vegetables means that the sets fruits and vegetables overlap. So some vegetables are also fruits. Step 2: This is exactly what conclusion 2 says: some vegetables are fruits. So conclusion 2 directly restates the overlap given in statement 1 and therefore definitely follows. Step 3: Interpret statement 2. Some vegetables are not edible. This gives a region inside the vegetables set that lies outside the edible set. However, this region may or may not overlap with fruits. Step 4: It is possible that the vegetables that are also fruits are all edible, while the non edible vegetables are a different group. In that case, no fruit is non edible, and conclusion 1 would be false. Step 5: Because such a diagram satisfies both statements but makes conclusion 1 false, conclusion 1 does not necessarily follow.

Verification / Alternative check:
Construct an example. Let fruits be {apple, mango}, vegetables be {apple, mango, bitter_leaf}, edible items be {apple, mango}. Here apple and mango are both fruits and vegetables and are edible. Bitter_leaf is a vegetable but not edible. Both statements are true, yet there is no fruit that is not edible, so conclusion 1 fails. However, some vegetables (apple and mango) are fruits, so conclusion 2 holds in every such construction that respects statement 1.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Option A claims that neither conclusion follows, which ignores the direct overlap between fruits and vegetables given by statement 1. Option B chooses only conclusion 1, which is not forced. Option D says both follow, but we have shown that conclusion 1 can fail. Option E suggests an either or condition that is not relevant here, because only conclusion 2 is certain.

Common Pitfalls:
Students often assume that if some vegetables are not edible and some fruits are vegetables, then there must be a fruit that is not edible. This is not logically necessary, because the overlapping part of fruits and vegetables may fall entirely inside the edible region while the non edible part remains separate.

Final Answer:
The correct evaluation is that only conclusion 2 follows from the given statements.