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.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The argument that the Madagascan shrimp will quickly become an endangered species in the next several years is based on multiple parameters. The decrease in the species population can be attributed to the recent incursions by deep-sea fishermen into their habitats if the following evidence is provided.
It is important to know which fish the deep-sea fishermen intend to catch during their incursions. For instance catching of any other, more profitable fish seems plausible as these incursions obviously cost money and the fishermen would want to maximize the margin and consequently the profits. If this is the case, deep-sea fishermen are surely not even the reason for the reduction in Madagascan shrimp population.
If that is not correct and the deep-sea fishermen are indeed fishing shrimp, the reduction in population can be justified. But, to claim that the Madagascan shrimp will quickly become an endangered species more information about the rate of reproduction in Madagascan shrimp and the length in time of the breeding season is necessary because if the rate of the supply of new shrimp to the habitat is equal to the rate at which the fishermen are depleting the habitat, it will nullify each other and the shrimp population will only fluctuate withing bounds in between the breeding and non-breeding periods.
The quality of the fishing and sailing pratices by the deep-sea fishermen is also an important parameter to consider. Regardless of what and wether the fishermen are catching if they harm the Madagascan shrimp in some other way, spilling poisonous substances for instance, this upward trend in the incursions by deep-sea fishermen migh indeed make Madagascan shrimp and endangered species soon.
Thus the strength of the argument depends on these multiple parameters and evidence about all these will individually strengthen or weaken the argument as discussed.
| 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 |
- 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, th 77
- Universities should require students to take courses only within those fields they are interested in studying.Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting 66
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 10 15
No. of Words: 300 350
No. of Characters: 1571 1500
No. of Different Words: 141 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.162 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.237 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.775 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 126 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 100 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 79 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 30 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 18.374 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.8 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.43 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.717 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.113 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... shrimp and endangered species soon. Thus the strength of the argument depends on...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, if, so, then, thus, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 19.6327345309 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 13.6137724551 37% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 28.8173652695 45% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 55.5748502994 65% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1604.0 2260.96107784 71% => OK
No of words: 300.0 441.139720559 68% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.34666666667 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16179145029 4.56307096286 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81909362897 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 204.123752495 71% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.48 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 490.5 705.55239521 70% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 19.7664670659 51% => 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: 30.0 22.8473053892 131% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 109.418280008 57.8364921388 189% => OK
Chars per sentence: 160.4 119.503703932 134% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.0 23.324526521 129% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.7 5.70786347227 100% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.357551427723 0.218282227539 164% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.147815718682 0.0743258471296 199% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0892975475337 0.0701772020484 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.191301510983 0.128457276422 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.101278443409 0.0628817314937 161% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.8 14.3799401198 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.03 48.3550499002 85% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.197005988 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.34 12.5979740519 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 98.500998004 62% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 11.1389221557 126% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.9071856287 126% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.