Haven't commented on this yet because I'm not comlpletely convinced to either A or B. How does B equate to 'definitely increasing genetic variation'?
EDIT: Although I am pretty much 90% on A for those interested to know.
recombinations, mutations and such through more eggs etc
That comes with the assumption that access to such bushes were the limiting factor to begin with. My thought process behind this question is as follows;
1. There are now 6 populations at Kiata, 1 at Castlemaine, 0 at Eltham; hence the environmental conditions at Eltham are not suited to the genetic characteristics of the small initial population.
2. Hence, the initial population migrated in the direction of Kiata. Note how Kiata is further away from Eltham than Castlemaine, and hence its environmental characteristics would be more different.
3. That means a certain environmental characteristic in Kiata is more suited to the butterflies.
4. This environmental characteristic
could have been the lack of bushes limiting reproduction.
5.
However, this cannot be a certainty. There are plenty of possible factors. e.g. predators (NIGGERSAURUS!?) in Eltham eating them up.
6. In such a case, the
best answer is A, in order to increase genetic diversity, and solve any possible factor, regardless of what it is.
EDIT: Once again, VCAA may decide to award two answers to this question as they have done in Biology exams many times. I do find it to be a bit ambiguous, but that's the best reasoning I can give you guys in order to conclude anything.