sdasd
The reading and lecture are both about theories that extracted from agnostids fossils, which these results show agnostids were primitive arthropods. The author of reading believes that some theories can explain about how agnostids may have lived. The lecture challenges the statements made by the author. The professor is of the opinion that these theories are a weakness.
First of all, the author suggests that agnostids can be free-swimming predators which hunt smaller animals. It is important because the type of primitive arthropods live in the ocean that is strong swimmers and better predators. This theory is challenged by the lecture. She says the primitive arthropods have large eyes, so they can have a good vision from the prey, but fossils of the agnostids have a different structure from primitive arthropods. He argues that the agnostids have tiny poorly eyes and even can presume they are blind. Therefore, they have not the ability to prey their victims. Moreover, the speaker mentions that the agnostid probably has another sense of chasing.
Secondly, the writer contends that the agnostid lived in the seafloor because researchers can find an example of primitive animals that already are inhabitant in the seafloor. The article notes that they could survive by special tactics like grazing on bacteria. The lecture, however, rebuts this by asserting that animals that live in the seafloor have a slow move and they do not traverse across the sea very fast. He elaborates on this by mentioning that an animal which lives in a bottom sea has not vast geographic area while the agnostid had multiple spaces for living, and this evidence shows they move easily, so we understand they are not seafloor dwellers because they have attributes that are different from seafloor animals.
Finally, it is stated in the article that the agnostids were a parasite, which living on and feeding off big organisms. The author establishes that there are species of modern-day arthropods that have this behavior. The lecture, on the other hand, posits that the population of parasites animals is limit because if the population is large, they will kill animals. He explains that this idea for agnostids is incorrect because they can find many fossilized individuals. Therefore these proofs can reject this theory about them.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-05 | NIMA SAEEDI | 3 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: grades encourage students to learn. Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion. 70
- You have long been friends with someone. If they do something that you do not like, should you still be friends with him or her? 73
- Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific methods proposed in the reading passage.frog's population which have declined in recent years 80
- Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific methods proposed in the reading passage. humpback whales navigation by stars 80
- Which one do you think is important to long – lasting friendship?1.Help you when you need 2.Share same interest and hobby3.Trust 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 248, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ain about how agnostids may have lived. The lecture challenges the statements made ...
^^^
Line 1, column 306, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...nges the statements made by the author. The professor is of the opinion that these ...
^^^
Line 7, column 471, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...y can find many fossilized individuals. Therefore these proofs can reject this theory abo...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, while, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 23.0 12.0772626932 190% => OK
Pronoun: 48.0 22.412803532 214% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1960.0 1373.03311258 143% => OK
No of words: 377.0 270.72406181 139% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19893899204 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4064143971 4.04702891845 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5948695293 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 145.348785872 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.506631299735 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 611.1 419.366225166 146% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 13.0662251656 153% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 60.8012129813 49.2860985944 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.0 110.228320801 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.85 21.698381199 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.3 7.06452816374 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.88 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.42 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 63.6247240618 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.