Recent incursions by deep-sea fishermen into the habitat of the Madagascan shrimp have led to a significant reduction in the species population. With the breeding season fast approaching, the number of shrimp should soon begin to increase. Nonetheless, the population should not return to the levels before the fishing boats arrived. Because this trend is expected to continue over the next several years, the Madagascan shrimp will quickly become an endangered species.
The argument that Madagascan shrimp will become an endangered species as it stands now, is weak. There are specific pieces of evidence needed to strengthen the argument. The three pieces of evidence needed are results showing how fishing incursions have led to a significant reduction in the shrimp population, results of how breeding season will increase shrimp numbers, and evidence of what makes the author certain that this trend will continue to occur over the next several years.
In order to obtain the results showing how fishing incursions have reduced the Madagascan shrimp population, there needs to be a study conducted on the recent incursions. Mainly, the study needs to investigate the shrimp population before the incursions and then after. If there is a significant difference between the two timepoints, it can be inferred that fishing incursion do indeed affect shrimp populations. If a significant difference is not found, then research should be done to determine what other factors could so greatly impact the Madagascan shrimp population. Additionally, the argument needs to include the actual results of the study done in order to provide proof.
To obtain results of how breeding season will increase shrimp numbers, a study should be conducted on previous breeding seasons of the shrimp to determine the percent increase in the shrimp population. Additionally, fishing incursions should be included especially if they are the reason for the reduction in the shrimp population. Analyses should be conducted to compare the shrimp populations both before and after the fishing incursions. To strengthen the argument, the results of this study should be included to show by just how much breeding seasons help to increase the shrimp population.
Finally, the author can ascertain the trend of the shrimp population and how the Madagascan shrimp will become an endangered species. If the evidence above clearly shows that fishing incursions greatly reduce the shrimp population and that the breeding of these shrimp will not significantly bring back the shrimp levels to what they were before the fishing occurred, then the argument has a winning argument that these types of shrimp will indeed become endangered.
Overall, strong evidence and results and obvious data will definitely improve and strengthen the current argument.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-15 | Deepanshu Dewangan | 37 | view |
| 2019-09-13 | bharadwaj98 | 65 | view |
| 2019-09-13 | solankis304 | 23 | view |
| 2019-09-03 | aneela | 23 | view |
| 2019-08-27 | Lutfor Rahman Rony | 58 | view |
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ??? out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 368 350
No. of Characters: 1950 1500
No. of Different Words: 142 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.38 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.299 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.681 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 171 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 119 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 79 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 49 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.533 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.999 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.4 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.433 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.651 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.17 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, if, so, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 28.8173652695 49% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 55.5748502994 77% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 16.3942115768 152% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1995.0 2260.96107784 88% => OK
No of words: 368.0 441.139720559 83% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.42119565217 5.12650576532 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.37987740619 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77532669572 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 146.0 204.123752495 72% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.396739130435 0.468620217663 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 602.1 705.55239521 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.2164523102 57.8364921388 127% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.0 119.503703932 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5333333333 23.324526521 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.4 5.70786347227 25% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.20758483034 85% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.283045016525 0.218282227539 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.119682789362 0.0743258471296 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0710270531086 0.0701772020484 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.166044125498 0.128457276422 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0867247659299 0.0628817314937 138% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 14.3799401198 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.5979740519 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.87 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 98.500998004 72% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.