Pieter Bruegel's iconic 1565 painting The Harvesters hangs at the Metropolitan Museum of Art.The work shows people harvesting wheat nearly as tall as they were."Nowadays，however，if you walk through a wheat field，you basically see that wheat is about knee-height.The reduced height is essentially a consequence of breeding（培育） along with genes for increasing production to feed a growing population，"biologist De Smet explained.
   De Smet says wheat is just one example of how historical artwork can allow us to track the transformation of food rTops over time.He teamed up with art historian Vergauwen，a friend since childhood，to document such artwork around the world.They have been mainly looking at things where they can spot changes in shape，color and size.
   Their interest in plants in artwork began with a visit to the Hermitage Museum，where they noticed an odd-looking watermelon in an early-17th-century painting.It appeared to be pale and white on the inside.Biologist De Smet assumed the painter had done a poor job.But art historian Vergauwen had a different idea."No，this is one of the best painters ever from that era.So if he painted it like that，that's the way it must have looked like，"he explained.
   Other paintings revealed that both red and white watermelons were grown during the 17th century."With all the genetic knowledge we now have，we can look in more detail how something comes about，"De Smet said."For example，until the 18th century，European strawberries appeared tiny in paintings—they then grew in size as they were crossbred（雜交） with North American varieties."
   Ultimately，the team hopes to create an online research database of historical plant artwork.They seek the contributions of art enthusiasts around the world via the social media."However，"Vergauwen reminds，"if you're going to use，for example.Picasso to try and understand how a pear looked in the early 20th century，you might be misled."

（1）What can we learn about the painting The Harvesters？

D

D

A．It shows how people successfully grew wheat.
B．It proves that wheat was much shorter in the past.
C．It explains the consequence of different breeding methods.
D．It gives clues about how wheat in the 16th century looked like.
（2）What inspired De Smet and Vergauwen to research the transformation of food crops over time？

C

C

A．Their preference for food crops.
B．Their friendship since childhood.
C．Their divided views on an old painting.
D．Their shared interest in the Hermitage Muscum.
（3）What can we infer from Vergauwen's words in the last paragraph？

C

C

A．Art enthusinsts are not careful enough.
B．The source paintings need to be realistic.
C．Abstract paintings often mislead people.
D．Picasso's paintings are hard to understand.