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.
The lecturer challenges the topic proposed in the reading that there are several different theories about how agnostids may have lived. And she thinks each of these theories has serious weaknesses.
First, the passage indicates that the agnostids may have been free-swimming predators that hunted smaller animals. However, the professor points out that all of active predators as primitive arthropods have well-developed eyes to trace the prey. By contrast, the agnostids have tiny poorly-developed eyes and sometimes even blind, so they cannot exactly trace their preys. Plus, fossil records do not show the agnostids have other special sensory organs for them to locate their preys. Thus, this theory is unreliable.
Second, the article supposes another theory that the agnostids may have dwelled on the seafloor. But the lecturer supports that other primitive arthropods do not move fastly to a far area. Instead, they occupy a small area where they originated and move slowly around there. Compared with primitive arthropods, the agnostids have multiple dwellings move rapidly from one place to another. Hence, this theory is unusual for the agnostids.
Third, the essay mentions another theory that the agnostids were parasites which live on and feeding off larger organisms. Nevertheless, the professor argues that the population of parasite is not very large which has a certain limit because too much parasites would kill their hosts. But the population of the agnostids is very huge, and there are a large amount of individuals of the agnostids found from ancient records. Consequently, this theory is also tenuous.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 74, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'several'.
Suggestion: several
... proposed in the reading that there are several different theories about how agnostids may have l...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 247, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...e which has a certain limit because too much parasites would kill their hosts. But t...
^^^^
Line 7, column 358, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'amounts'?
Suggestion: amounts
...ids is very huge, and there are a large amount of individuals of the agnostids found f...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, hence, however, if, may, nevertheless, second, so, third, thus, well
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 21.0 30.3222958057 69% => 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: 1377.0 1373.03311258 100% => OK
No of words: 254.0 270.72406181 94% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.42125984252 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.99216450694 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70329994926 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.59842519685 0.540411800872 111% => OK
syllable_count: 425.7 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.6501620051 49.2860985944 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.0625 110.228320801 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.875 21.698381199 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.25 7.06452816374 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.164382946059 0.272083759551 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0510446046239 0.0996497079465 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.04348061272 0.0662205650399 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0927142312994 0.162205337803 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0244236274834 0.0443174109184 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.3589403974 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 47.79 53.8541721854 89% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.86 12.2367328918 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.61 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.