The bowerbirds of Australia derive their name from the fact that the males build elaborate bowers of sticks and twigs to attract females, decorating them with flowers and other vegetation in a display of courtship.
a) the fact that the males build elaborate bowers of sticks and twigs to attract females, decorating them with flowers and other vegetation
b) the elaborate bowers of sticks and twigs that the males build and decorate with flowers and other vegetation in order to attract females
c) the elaborate bowers of sticks and twigs, decorated with flowers and other vegetation that the males use to attract females
d) the fact that the males build elaborate bowers of sticks and twigs, having decorated them with flowers and other vegetation, to attract females
e) the elaborate bowers of sticks and twigs that are built by the males and decorated with flowers and other vegetation to attract females


I don't understand in e) the explanation said " Moreover, the placement of the modifier "that are built by the males" incorrectly implies the sticks and twigs are built by the males" but in b) isn't it pretty much the same thing "sticks and tiwgs that the males build" Can you explain why B) doesn't say that?

Thanks!

Ah yes. If the explanation is discriminating based on THAT distinction, then ... well, it's the wrong explanation. You're correct to point out that the modifiers in B and E are constructed in essentially the same way. What's more, they're both fine - when you have a construction involving 'an X of Y', or, in general, 'X (preposition) Y', it's possible for the modifier to refer to EITHER 'Y' or the entire phrase 'X (preposition) Y'. We've seen copious examples of this on official problems.

We will attend to the problem in the explanation; thank you for calling attention to it.

The real problem with choice E is one of meaning. Specifically, it says 'built by the males and decorated with flowers and other vegetation'. That's a problem, because it doesn't carry the intended meaning: i.e., that the males decorate the bowers in addition to building them. In fact, this wording seems to imply that the males aren't the ones that decorate the bowers, because the sentence goes to the pain of specifically saying 'built by the males' before mentioning the decoration (by some anonymous/unknown agent). Since the original sentence clearly implies that the males both build and decorate the bowers - and you aren't supposed to change the meaning of a sentence unless the original is nonsense - you have to stick with that.