A negatively charged rod touched a mounted sphere. The results were that the sphere acquired a negative charge at the location of the point of contact. What does this result mean for the sphere touched?

The correct interpretation of the scenario you described is:

The sphere is a conductor because the charge acquired remained in the location of contact.

In conductors, charges are free to move and distribute themselves across the entire surface when touched by another charged object. However, if the charge remains localized at the point of contact rather than spreading out, this indicates that the sphere does not allow for charge mobility throughout its surface in the same way as a conductor typically would—indicating that it is not behaving like a typical conductor. This leads to the conclusion that the sphere might not be a perfect conductor, which hints at potential properties of influence from other surfaces or environmental factors as well. However, based on the provided options, the correct selection from your statement would lead to the consideration of it being treated more like an insulator if the charge is localized.

In typical cases of conductors, charge would spread across the surface rapidly upon contact with a charged object, so the behavior observed here suggests unique properties or conditions affecting the outcome.