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
Due to 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 but their population is not expected to return to levels before the fishing boats arrived. Due to this "trend" (which is ambiguous) which is expected to continue over the next several years, then Madagascan shrimp will quickly become an endangered species.
This arguement is flawed for several reason, no trend was explained, the argument never mentioned what the fishermen where harvesting, if they where harvesting shrimps, the rate at which the shrimps are breeding compare to the rate at which they were been consumed was not stated, and lastly no data to back up the claim that there will be continuous demand for shrimps.
Starting from my last point there should be statistics taken of the consumption rate of shrimp, from this data a forecast can be made from the trend in which fisher men will fish for shrimps, is it a native diet of Madagascan where they have special attributes attached to it's consumption and this and many should considered when taking a survey for reason why shrimp is added to their delicacies so and to determine its continuous demand.
It was not stated if the rate at which the shrimps at multiplying is higher than the rate at which they are been harvested, without these been clearly stated the conclusion and arguement has no basis, because if the breeding rate is higher than the havesting rating, this is more of like a culling employed by the fisherman to control population of shrimp and hence ensure balance in nature.
The argument can only be valid if it strengthened by making clear what it meant by the trend and also clear stating what wast been harvested by the fisherman.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 8 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 7 15
No. of Words: 318 350
No. of Characters: 1525 1500
No. of Different Words: 159 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.223 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.796 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.523 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 109 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 74 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 52 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 37 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 45.429 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 21.4 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.857 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.446 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.446 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.092 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 30, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun reason seems to be countable; consider using: 'several reasons'.
Suggestion: several reasons
... species. This arguement is flawed for several reason, no trend was explained, the argument n...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 144, Rule ID: THEY_WHERE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'were', the simple past of "to be"?
Suggestion: were
...the fishermen where harvesting, if they where harvesting shrimps, the rate at which t...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, if, lastly, so, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 28.8173652695 69% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 55.5748502994 77% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1563.0 2260.96107784 69% => OK
No of words: 318.0 441.139720559 72% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.91509433962 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22286093782 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68184426753 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 167.0 204.123752495 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.525157232704 0.468620217663 112% => OK
syllable_count: 468.9 705.55239521 66% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => 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: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 19.7664670659 35% => 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: 45.0 22.8473053892 197% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 117.491467341 57.8364921388 203% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 223.285714286 119.503703932 187% => OK
Words per sentence: 45.4285714286 23.324526521 195% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.42857142857 5.70786347227 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 6.88822355289 15% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.67664670659 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.261068671051 0.218282227539 120% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.163179033106 0.0743258471296 220% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.183696772929 0.0701772020484 262% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140393859571 0.128457276422 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.177294973657 0.0628817314937 282% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 24.5 14.3799401198 170% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 34.26 48.3550499002 71% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 19.7 12.197005988 162% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.14 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.44 8.32208582834 113% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 98.500998004 73% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 12.3882235529 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 20.0 11.1389221557 180% => OK
text_standard: 20.0 11.9071856287 168% => 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.