The conclusion that the Madagascan shrimp will quickly become an endangered species is based on weak reasons/evidence and many unstated assumptions which if proven otherwise will make the conclusion will fall apart.
First, there is no evidence stating that reduction in the number of Madagascan shrimp is due to the fishing of these shrimps by the fishermen. The habitat of Madagascan shrimp might also be the habitat of other aquatic animal and deep-sea fishermen might have entered this habitat for the fishing of these other animals. The significant reduction in the Madagascan shrimp population can be due to some other factor. For instance, change in the water temperature due to global warming.
Second, There is no evidence proving that the deep fishermen will continue their incursions over the next several years. The fishermen might have entered for fishing of some other specific species and after fishing them they might not return.
Third, there is no information stating that this is the only habitat for Madagascan shrimp in the whole world. There might me other places where Madagascan shrimp might be in abundance and the reduction of the population in this specific location might not lead to their extinction.
In conclusion, the argument is based on many unstated assumptions and if those assumptions are proven otherwise, the conclusion will fall apart. Therefore, this is a weak argument.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 155, Rule ID: IF_IS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'is'?
Suggestion: is
...nce and many unstated assumptions which if proven otherwise will make the conclusi...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, if, second, so, therefore, third, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 19.6327345309 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 12.9520958084 100% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 11.1786427146 45% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 28.8173652695 56% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 55.5748502994 41% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1198.0 2260.96107784 53% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 226.0 441.139720559 51% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.30088495575 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.87727950738 4.56307096286 85% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75876350896 2.78398813304 99% => OK
Unique words: 104.0 204.123752495 51% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.46017699115 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 369.0 705.55239521 52% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.471057884232 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
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: 11.0 19.7664670659 56% => 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: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.7125147258 57.8364921388 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.909090909 119.503703932 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5454545455 23.324526521 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.72727272727 5.70786347227 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.197705251278 0.218282227539 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.082491484728 0.0743258471296 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0702367215581 0.0701772020484 100% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0998180298571 0.128457276422 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0794610895123 0.0628817314937 126% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.3550499002 106% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.46 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.7 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 44.0 98.500998004 45% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum 250 words wanted.
Rates: 33.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 2.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.