Various studies have shown that our forested and hilly regions, and, in general, areas where biodiversity - - as reflected in the variety of flora - - is high, are the places where poverty appears to be high. And these same areas are also the ones where educational performance seems to be poor. Therefore, it may be surmised that, even disregarding poverty status, richness in biodiversity goes hand in hand with educational backwardness.

Which one of the following statements, if true, can be said to best provide supporting evidence for the surmise mentioned in the passage?

In regions where there is little variety in flora, educational performance is seen to be as good as in regions with high variety in flora, when poverty levels are high.

Regions, which show high biodiversity, also exhibit poor educational performance, at low levels of poverty.

Regions, which show high biodiversity, reveal high levels of poverty and poor educational performance.

In regions where there is low biodiversity, at all levels of poverty, educational performance is seen to be good.

Regions with low bio-diversity, though having high levels of poverty, do not have such wide disparities in educational performance.