Agnostids were a group of marine animalsthat became extinct about 450 millionyears ago. Agnostid fossils can be found inrocks in many areas around the world. From the fossil remains, we know thatagnostids were primitive arthropods-relatives of modern-day insects. However, the fossil information does not allowpaleontologists to determine with certaintywhat agnostids ate or how they behaved. There are several different theories abouthow agnostids may have lived. Free-Swimming Predators First, the agnostidsmay have been free-swimming predatorsthat hunted smaller animals. It is knownthat other types of primitive arthropodswere strong swimmers and activepredators, so it is reasonable that theagnostids may have lived that way as well. And while the agnostids were small, sometimes just six millimeters long, therewere plenty of smaller organisms in theancient ocean for them to prey on. SeafloorDwellers Second, they may have dwelled onthe seafloor. Again, there are examples ofother types of primitive arthropods livingthis way, so it is possible that agnostidsdid too. On the seafloor they would havesurvived by scavenging dead organisms orby grazing on bacteria. Parasites Third, there is the possibility that the agnostidswere parasites, living on and feeding offlarger organisms. One reason that thisseems possible is that there are manyspecies of modern-day arthropods thatexist as parasites, such as fleas, ticks, andmites. The agnostids might have lived onprimitive fish or even on other, largerarthropods.
According to reading passage, there are three possible reasons that reveal the living condition of Agnostids. While the lecturer founds that all the reasons have serious flaw and adds another possible reasons that contradict the idea of reading passage.
First, the author asserts that, other primitive artropods have swimming ability which in turn makes them able to act as predator. So that, the Agnostids are also live as predator. On contrary, the lecturer repudiates the assertion of the passage by illustrating that, Agnostids have to large eye to live as predator, but the Agnostids have small tiny eye, almost blind that reject the idea that Agnostids are predators.
Second, the writer avers that, the Agnostids are scavenger; the primitive arthopods lived on sea floor and act as scavenger and fed on dead organigms. However, the professor disapproves the reasons by demonstrating that, scavengers are not capable of moving very fast, consequently, they live in a certain area. The lecturer put her idea forward by adding that, the Agnostids are found in many different places. That indicates Agnostids are effable of moving fast, this theory also prove that Agnostids are not scavenger.
Third, the passage mentions that Agnostids are parasite since modern arthopods are living on large anomal as parasites. On the other hand, the lecture opposes the idea by illustrating that, parasites have limited number of species, additionally, Agnostids have large number of species which rule out the authors idea about parasite.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 390, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
...adding that, the Agnostids are found in many different places. That indicates Agnostids are ef...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 305, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...ge number of species which rule out the authors idea about parasite.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, however, if, second, so, third, while, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1301.0 1373.03311258 95% => OK
No of words: 242.0 270.72406181 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.37603305785 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.94415379849 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64926311289 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 131.0 145.348785872 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.54132231405 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 412.2 419.366225166 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.3587132481 49.2860985944 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.272727273 110.228320801 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 21.698381199 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.0 7.06452816374 113% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
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: 0.121482385679 0.272083759551 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0557908410358 0.0996497079465 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0348228446589 0.0662205650399 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0737906709993 0.162205337803 45% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0386453219242 0.0443174109184 87% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.3589403974 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 53.8541721854 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.0289183223 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.2367328918 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.77 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 63.6247240618 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.