Could you explain the last question in more detail, pls?

How option C is also correct for Q2? There's nothing mentioned about ancestors or previous gen. in the passage.

OE

1) (C) If the researchers are calling the explanation a “useful way to tie” things together, it makes sense that “hailed” means lauded (praised) in this context

2) (B, C) Like any trait that current organisms possess, conspicuous markings must exist because organisms with them are the offspring of previous generations that survived long enough to
reproduce. By saying that there is a “trade off” in terms of color function, the author implies that any trait would not exist unless it had a corresponding benefit to the organism’s survival, and
therefore, its reproduction. He also implies that conspicuous markings may be detrimental to an organism, contrasting them with cryptic (camouflaging) markings, giving further evidence that being conspicuous must help an organism breed, (B). Choice (C) is also supported by this reasoning

3) (B) By saying that an organism’s color is an “adaptive function,” the author implies that its color can help the organism in different ways at different times, which supports the assertion that these demands may be “competing,” i.e., a color that helps with one demand may be unhelpful for another.

Carcass Sir, i always stuck whenever answer choice comes up with "Unlikely" , as Unlikely gives the notion of possibility thus
if we read the option 1 of question 1 , it said "An Organism" may not live for a long time, making it less likely to pass on its genes to the next generation.

it is talking about a particular organism using possibility and as per passage clear visible markings are harmful for survival thus its is inferable , this is not extreme.

please guide here.

Also in question 3 , please check my reasoning :

Answer choice : suggest that organisms that have learned to adapt to their surroundings have a greater chance of survival than those that are less adaptable

As per my understanding this adaptive nature of coloring is not in the hand of organisms, it is depend upon the environment with different wavelengths of lights thus we can say that "learning to adapt their surrounding is not possible for organism" because it is any evolutionary thing and
organism are bind with it.

Thus we can say Answer choice B : provide reasoning for the assertion that an organism’s coloring can make its survival more difficult >> is correct as adaptive nature of coloring from cryptic to conspicuous under different environment make their survival more difficult.

As per our reasoning is correct

as per you question A ) says

A. An organism with conspicuous markings will be unlikely to survive long enough to pass its genes to later generations.

You should read carefully but also see the whole picture an not to focus on a single word

A says, in brief, that an organism with a consistent color will not survive so long to transfer that to the offspring

In the passage, the only mention of conspicuous or consistent color is when is explained that a color can be consistent in a context but the same consistency can not be so useful in another context

a color pattern that is cryptic in one environment may be conspicuous in another.

I am a fish. I have a specific color to avoid predators, and I swim in the Atlantic Ocean. However, If I swim in the pacific ocean that same color could be unuseful to me and avoid predators

I hope this helps