Agnostids were a group of marine animals that became extinct about 450 million years ago Agnostid fossils can be found in rocks in many areas around the world From the fossil remains we know that agnostids were primitive arthropods relatives of modern day

Essay topics:

Agnostids were a group of marine animals that became extinct about 450 million years ago. Agnostid fossils can be found in rocks in many areas around the world. From the fossil remains, we know that agnostids were primitive arthropods-relatives of modern-day insects. However, the fossil information does not allow paleontologists to determine with certainty what agnostids ate or how they behaved. There are several different theories about how agnostids may have lived.

Free-Swimming Predators

First, the agnostids may have been free-swimming predators that hunted smaller animals. It is known that other types of primitive arthropods were strong swimmers and active predators, so it is reasonable that the agnostids may have lived that way as well And while the agnostids were small, sometimes just six millimeters long, there were plenty of smaller organisms in the ancient ocean for them to prey on.

Seafloor Dwellers

Second, they may have dwelled on the seafloor. Again, there are examples of other types of primitive arthropods living this way, so it is possible that agnostids did too. On the seafloor they would have survived by scavenging dead organisms or by grazing on bacteria.


Third, there is the possibility that the agnostids were parasites, living on and feeding off larger organisms. One reason that this seems possible is that there are many species of modern-day arthropods that exist as parasites, such as fleas, ticks, and mites. The agnostids might have lived on primitive fish or even on other, larger arthropods.

The reading and the lecture are about the agnostids livelihood. The article provides three supporting ideas in order to strengthen its claim regarding the agnostids living. However, the professor found every reading claims are questionable. She refutes each of the reasoning made by the passage.
First, the article asserts that agnostids are free floating hunters. But, the lecturer denies this idea. Apart from that, she says, the comparison with arthropods is not a pragmatic idea since arthropods have well developed eyes. Moreover, agnostids are very tiny creature and they have not any sensory abilities to hunt smaller animals.
Second, the reading states that the agnostids were living on the ground of the ocean and they survived by scavenging. However, the narrator refutes this claim. In addition she explains that, if they were firmed in sea floor then the claim is true but the agnostids were travelling from one place to another that undermines this idea.
Third, the written excerpt claims that the agnostids were parasite. This proposition is quite incoherent with the professor. On the other hand, the lecturer describes, if they were parasite then their population would have been smaller. But, evidence suggest that, the agnostids population were larger and also greater in size. So, the idea is not feasible with the parasitic property.

Average: 7.5 (1 vote)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:


Grammar and spelling errors:
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: addition,, the narrator refutes this claim. In addition she explains that, if they were firmed ...
Line 4, column 311, Rule ID: ADJECTIVE_IN_ATTRIBUTE[1]
Message: A more concise phrase may lose no meaning and sound more powerful.
Suggestion: greater
...nostids population were larger and also greater in size. So, the idea is not feasible with the ...

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, moreover, regarding, second, so, then, third, well, apart from, in addition, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 21.0 30.3222958057 69% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1147.0 1373.03311258 84% => OK
No of words: 215.0 270.72406181 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.33488372093 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82921379641 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55083099748 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 126.0 145.348785872 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.586046511628 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 353.7 419.366225166 84% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 21.2450331126 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.7209234903 49.2860985944 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 71.6875 110.228320801 65% => OK
Words per sentence: 13.4375 21.698381199 62% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.8125 7.06452816374 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.203469394394 0.272083759551 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0688495317728 0.0996497079465 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0605220495478 0.0662205650399 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13057058686 0.162205337803 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0205970539903 0.0443174109184 46% => 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: 10.4 13.3589403974 78% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.28 53.8541721854 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.04 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.61 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.2 10.498013245 69% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?


Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.