Among the intriguing mysteries that the dinosaurs have left for us, one of the most persistent is what the arms of Tyrannosaurus Rex (T.rex) were used for. A recent presentation to the American Geological Society presented evidence to support the idea that the arms were well-adapted for slashing attacks on T. rex's prey.
Firstly there is evidence related to the structure of the arms. The arms of T. rex appeared to be so tiny and weak compared to the rest of its body that early researchers dismissed them as being virtually useless. But recent analysis of marks on the fossilized bones of T. rex arms show that they were connected by significant amounts of muscle tissue: enough to lift or push nearly 400 kilograms. They would have had plenty of power to slash.
Secondly, the claws of T. rex show an unusual feature which would have made them very well-suited to slashing. Each arm has only two claws, as opposed to the three claws that are normal on smaller carnivorous dinosaurs. The reduced number of claws means that the power of the arm would be focused onto just two points, resulting in deeper cuts. And the curved claws themselves were 6 to 10 centimeters long, similar in size to the teeth of T. rex.
Thirdly, the length of the arms makes sense in terms of efficiency. The arms could have provided T. rex with the means to slash at prey held in its jaws. With the jaws holding the prey close, the arms would have been able to tear gashes over a meter long and several centimeters deep in just a few seconds. Longer or heavier arms might have done the job better, but they would have weighed more and cost T. rex too much energy to carry around.
The reading and the lecture are both about the arms of the Tyrannosaurus Rex and their utilization in the process of slashing the prey. The author of the article feels that there was a significant contribution of the hands in tearing the animals. The lecturer disputes the claims made in the article by giving scientific examples which suggests that the arms did not have much barring in the cutting of the prey.
According to the reading, the arms of Trex were not capable of cutting the food. The article mentions that the hands were too small and weak in comparison to the body of Trex that they would be of no use in slashing preys. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. He claims that it is not the primary purpose of the hands to do the hunting. Additionally, he points out that the hands which were broken when the dinosaur was alive has shown the evidence to heal. It means that Trex would have died if the arms had broken as it would not be able to catch the prey.
Secondly, the author suggests that the claws of Trex were quite good for slashing purpose. In the article, it is said that the arms were having only two claws which were very long that they can be used to slash the animal. The lecturer, however, asserts that the claws were not of much importance as the teeths of Trex were 30 centimetres long. He goes on to say that the bite pressure of Trex would be so magnificent that no other helping hand would be needed.
Finally, the author posits that the small length of the arms is efficient for the Trex. Holding the prey within the jaws and then tearing it apart by arms would help for effective catching of the prey. The author contends that if the hands were large, then Trex would have to spend a lot of energy to move from place to place. In contrast, the lecturer's stance is that the young Trex had small arms, but the older Trex had the same childlike arms, and therefore, they were not serving any purpose in slashing the prey. He notes that there is no standard barring to the hands after a particular age of Trex.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-10-26 | himanshukmr234 | 65 | view |
| 2021-10-03 | New_account | 73 | view |
| 2021-10-02 | devvratjoshi | 63 | view |
| 2021-10-02 | devvratjoshi | 63 | view |
| 2021-10-02 | devvratjoshi | 63 | view |
- In 20 years there will be less pollution in the air than there is today 70
- In 20 years there will be less pollution in the air than there is today 70
- In 20 years there will be less pollution in the air than there is today 60
- You have three minutes to read the following passage and take notes In many organizations perhaps the best way to approach certain new projects is to assemble a group of people into a team Having a team of people attack a project offers several advantages 76
- Playing games together is a good way to build closer relationships 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.
...on of the hands in tearing the animals. The lecturer disputes the claims made in th...
^^^
Line 7, column 345, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'lecturers'' or 'lecturer's'?
Suggestion: lecturers'; lecturer's
...e from place to place. In contrast, the lecturers stance is that the young Trex had small...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, however, if, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 10.4613686534 229% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 12.0772626932 174% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 22.412803532 138% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 47.0 30.3222958057 155% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1689.0 1373.03311258 123% => OK
No of words: 381.0 270.72406181 141% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.43307086614 5.08290768461 87% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41805628031 4.04702891845 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.25393156368 2.5805825403 87% => OK
Unique words: 170.0 145.348785872 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.446194225722 0.540411800872 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 504.9 419.366225166 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.55342163355 84% => 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: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.2645316098 49.2860985944 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.8333333333 110.228320801 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.1666666667 21.698381199 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.27777777778 7.06452816374 61% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 4.45695364238 247% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.127242646995 0.272083759551 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0467710306536 0.0996497079465 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0371176719337 0.0662205650399 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0853404143767 0.162205337803 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00722516573207 0.0443174109184 16% => 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: 10.0 13.3589403974 75% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 75.54 53.8541721854 140% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.9 11.0289183223 72% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 8.41 12.2367328918 69% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.25 8.42419426049 86% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 63.6247240618 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 63.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.0 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.