Did bees (a type of insect) exist on Earth as early as 200 million years ago? Such a theory is supported by the discovery of very old fossil structures that resemble bee nests. The structures have been found inside 200- million-year-old fossilized trees i

Essay topics:

Did bees (a type of insect) exist on Earth as early as 200 million years ago? Such a theory is supported by the discovery of very old fossil structures that resemble bee nests. The structures have been found inside 200- million-year-old fossilized trees in the state of Arizona in the southwestern United States. However, many skeptics doubt that the structures were created by bees. The skeptics support their view with several arguments.

No Fossils of Actual Bees

First, no fossil remains of actual bees have ever been found that date to 200 million years ago. The earliest preserved body of a bee is 100 million years old—only half as old as the fossilized structures discovered in Arizona.

Absence of Flowering Plants.

A second reason to doubt that bees existed 200 million years ago is the absence of flowering plants in that period. Today's bees feed almost exclusively on the flowers of flowering plants; in fact, bees and flowering plants have evolved a close, mutually dependent biological relationship. Flowering plants, however, first appeared on Earth 125 million years ago. Given the bees’ close association with flowering plants, it is unlikely bees could have existed before that time.

Structures Lack Some Details

Third, while the fossilized structures found in Arizona are somewhat similar to nest chambers made by modern bees, they lack some of the finer details of bees’ nests. For example, chambers of modern bee nests are closed by caps that have a spiral pattern, but the fossilized chambers lack such caps. That suggests the fossilized structures were made by other insects, such as wood-boring beetles.

The reading and lecture are both about possibility of extinction of the bees. The author of the reading feels that there are three explanations for the doubt of the theory. The lecture challenges the claims made by the author. He is of the opinion that three explanation of the theory is a skeptic.

To begin with, the author argues that no fossilize had been found of the actual bees about 200 million years ago. The article mention that may be for some reason it could not possible to preserve. The specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. He claims that for preserved the fossilize needed a specific type of plant liquid. It is possible that that type of the plant was not exited in that time. Additionally, she says such type of tree may exist in 200 million years later.

Secondly, the writer suggests flowery plants not exit of that time. The relationship between the bees and flowery plant is ver close and mutually related to biological relation. In the lecture, however, rebuts this by mentioning that it is possible that bees of that time depend on the other plants like pine. He elaborates on this by bringing up the points that it is also possible that bees later evolve to the flowery plant.

Finally, the author posits that fossilize that had been found is very close to the structure of the modern bee. Moreover, in the article, it is stated that the spiral pattern of the nest chamber is very close to modern bees. In contrast, the lecture's position is that for protecting the spiral pattern the bees used a special kind of waterproof material. when the fossilize is analyzed it proved that it contains the same chemical composition.

Votes
Average: 7 (1 vote)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2020-01-29 nusybah 78 view
2020-01-16 3dra 66 view
2020-01-10 Opak Pulup 70 view
2019-12-10 shrijan 85 view
2019-12-03 shatealabo1110 60 view
Essay Categories
Essays by user Seema Modak :

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 174, 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.
...planations for the doubt of the theory. The lecture challenges the claims made by t...
^^^
Line 1, column 259, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... author. He is of the opinion that three explanation of the theory is a skeptic. ...
^^
Line 5, column 126, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...about 200 million years ago. The article mention that may be for some reason it c...
^^
Line 5, column 281, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
... lecturer. He claims that for preserved the fossilize needed a specific type of plant liquid....
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 356, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: When
... a special kind of waterproof material. when the fossilize is analyzed it proved tha...
^^^^
Line 13, column 356, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “when” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... a special kind of waterproof material. when the fossilize is analyzed it proved tha...
^^^^
Line 13, column 361, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ecial kind of waterproof material. when the fossilize is analyzed it proved that it contains ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, in contrast, kind of, to begin with

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 20.0 12.0772626932 166% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 22.412803532 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1389.0 1373.03311258 101% => OK
No of words: 290.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.78965517241 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48865439815 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.48275862069 0.540411800872 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 426.6 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 23.8035296688 49.2860985944 48% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 77.1666666667 110.228320801 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.1111111111 21.698381199 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.83333333333 7.06452816374 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.27373068433 257% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.242476668199 0.272083759551 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0681672400291 0.0996497079465 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0974299971209 0.0662205650399 147% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127892804244 0.162205337803 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.106794885454 0.0443174109184 241% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.2 13.3589403974 69% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 53.8541721854 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.21 12.2367328918 83% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 63.6247240618 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 10.7273730684 51% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.