Three years ago, because of flooding at the Western Palean Wildlife Preserve, 100 lions and 100 western gazelles were moved to the East Palean Preserve, an area that is home to most of the same species that are found in the western preserve, though in larger numbers, and to the eastern gazelle, a close relative of the western gazelle. The only difference in climate is that the eastern preserve typically has slightly less rainfall. Unfortunately, after three years in the eastern preserve, the imported western gazelle population has been virtually eliminated. Since the slight reduction in rainfall cannot be the cause of the virtual elimination of western gazelle, their disappearance must have been caused by the larger number of predators in the eastern preserve.
In the argument, it is concluded that the disappearance of the western gazelles in the East preserve is due to the large number of the predators present in the eastern preserve. The conclusion is based on the assumption that the slight reduction in rainfall cannot be the cause of such disappearance and the large number of predator is assumed as the only cause. However, before the conclusion is properly evaluated, three questions must be answered.
First, it is assumed by the author that as the most of the species or the close relatives of the species of the western preserve are found in the eastern preserve also hence, this would be the favourable habitat for the western gazelles. Perhaps, it is possible that the habitat might not suited to the western gazelles. For example, the western gazelle might rely on the foods that differs from the eastern gazelle and it might not be available sufficiently in the eastern preserve. Thus, no clear evidence is provided the conclusion drawn is flawed.
Second, it is prematurely assumed by the author that the eastern preserve might be the best suitable habitat for the western gazelles, perhaps this might not be the case. It is possible that the western gazelles after located to the new preserve found it difficult to adapt to get the geography of the area. For instance, the western gazelles suffered in finding the various territory such lakes to drink water, and food sources areas and also the location for shelter. This might be the cause of the disappearance. If this scenario has merit than, the conclusion drawn does not hold water.
Third, it is assumed by the author that there are large number of predators that caused the disappearance. However, the case might be reverse, perhaps it is possible that the predators such lions are less in number and the it is possible that the area of eastern preserve is much smaller than the western preserve, this aid the predators to target large number of gazelles but because the western gazelles are new to this preserve it might be difficult for them to counter against such situation whereas the eastern gazelles are habitual to this habitat and have developed the mechanism to counter such type of situation. If this true then the conclusion is flawed.
In sum, the argument, as it stands now, is considerably flawed due to several unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to provide more evidence (probably more systematic) then it will be possible to fully evaluate the feasibility of the argument.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 3 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 426 350
No. of Characters: 2048 1500
No. of Different Words: 160 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.543 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.808 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.57 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 149 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 129 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 78 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 36 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.667 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 17.981 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.611 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.345 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.399 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.082 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 2 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 201, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: less
...sible that the predators such lions are less in number and the it is possible that the area of...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 220, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'it'?
Suggestion: the; it
...ators such lions are less in number and the it is possible that the area of eastern pr...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 364, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... the predators to target large number of gazelles but because the western gazelle...
^^
Line 4, column 624, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” 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.
...nism to counter such type of situation. If this true then the conclusion is flawed...
^^
Line 5, column 103, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “If” 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.
...due to several unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to provide more evid...
^^
Line 5, column 175, Rule ID: LESS_MORE_THEN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'than'?
Suggestion: than
... more evidence probably more systematic then it will be possible to fully evaluate t...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, second, so, then, third, thus, whereas, for example, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 33.0 19.6327345309 168% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.9520958084 93% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 55.5748502994 83% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2095.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 426.0 441.139720559 97% => OK
Chars per words: 4.91784037559 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54310108192 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65471786556 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 204.123752495 82% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.394366197183 0.468620217663 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 657.9 705.55239521 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 106.091818952 57.8364921388 183% => OK
Chars per sentence: 123.235294118 119.503703932 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.0588235294 23.324526521 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.05882352941 5.70786347227 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 5.25449101796 114% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.21579966623 0.218282227539 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0747586857866 0.0743258471296 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0906945986315 0.0701772020484 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.130137641238 0.128457276422 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0764028523066 0.0628817314937 122% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.3550499002 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.5979740519 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.84 8.32208582834 94% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 98.500998004 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4 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.