Both the reading and the lecture discuss the ancient mammal, named R. robustus, which may or may not be a hunter. The author of the reading believes that R. robustus is a scavenger, and provides three supporting reasons. However, the lecturer throws doubt on the claims presented in the article, by saying that it was, in fact, an active hunter.
First of all, the reading points out that CONSIDERING the size of R. robustus, virtually as small as domestic cats, it would not have been able to chase and hunt such large dinosaurs like psittacosaurs. So, the psittacosaur in the stomach of R. robustus fossil would have been related to an egg of an unhatched dinosaur. However, the lecture argues that DESPITE its little mass, R. robustus still was capable of hunting babies of dinosaurs. In particular, it was much greater than an offspring of a psittacosaur, in turn, the relics in its stomach would have belonged to its prey. Moreover, she asserts that todays' animals can pray on creatures twice larger than their own size, and this would have been the case for their ancestors.
In addition, the reading states that SINCE the R. robustus' legs are located on the sides of its body instead of beneath, which most characterizes predators, it would not have had the ability to run fast and follow dinosaurs as swift as psittacosaurs. So remnants in R. robustus' stomach would not have been, in all possibility, its prey. The professor counters this point by offering a counterexample: T.Devil is a contemporary animal having the similar drawback as R. robustus, but it can run at the velocity of 50 km/h and also it is an active hunter. Then, she adds that if a T.Devil is able to catch and kill its prey why its prehistory predecessor was not.
Lastly, according to the reading, no sign of damage on the bones of the psittacosaur in the stomach of the R. robustus fossil is compelling evidence that it would not have been the R. robustus' prey. By contrast, the listening passage posits that an important point about R. robustuses is neglected by the author: in spite of their powerful jaws, they did not utilize them to chew, as can be seen from various R. robustuses. They devoured big pieces of meat, so it is obvious that there was not any teeth mark on the bones of the psittacosaur. Accordingly, R. robustuse was a predator dinosaur.
- TOEFL integrated writing The sea otter 100
- Archaeologists have recently found a fossil of a 150 million year old mammal known as Repenornamus robustus R robustus Interestingly the mammal s stomach contained the remains of a psittacosaur dinosaur Some researchers have therefore suggested that R rob 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 403, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Devil
...s point by offering a counterexample: T.Devil is a contemporary animal having the sim...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 580, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: Devil
...tive hunter. Then, she adds that if a T.Devil is able to catch and kill its prey why ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, first, however, if, lastly, may, moreover, so, still, then, in addition, in fact, in particular, first of all, in spite of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 10.4613686534 201% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 35.0 22.412803532 156% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 52.0 30.3222958057 171% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1935.0 1373.03311258 141% => OK
No of words: 408.0 270.72406181 151% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.74264705882 5.08290768461 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49433085973 4.04702891845 111% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7456308569 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 208.0 145.348785872 143% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.509803921569 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 584.1 419.366225166 139% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 2.5761589404 311% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 13.0662251656 199% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 45.5752769311 49.2860985944 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 74.4230769231 110.228320801 68% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.6923076923 21.698381199 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.61538461538 7.06452816374 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 4.33554083885 231% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 14.0 4.27373068433 328% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.227049591345 0.272083759551 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0665501754531 0.0996497079465 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0621134529221 0.0662205650399 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.143025740033 0.162205337803 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.036397706726 0.0443174109184 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.7 13.3589403974 65% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 73.17 53.8541721854 136% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.8 11.0289183223 62% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.92 12.2367328918 81% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.9 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 63.6247240618 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 10.7273730684 51% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 65.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.5 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.