Among the intriguing mysteries that the dinosaurs have left for us, one of the most persistent is what the arms of Tyrannosaurus Rex (T.rex) were used for. A recent presentation to the American Geological Society presented evidence to support the idea that the arms were well-adapted for slashing attacks on T. rex's prey.
Firstly there is evidence related to the structure of the arms. The arms of T. rex appeared to be so tiny and weak compared to the rest of its body that early researchers dismissed them as being virtually useless. But recent analysis of marks on the fossilized bones of T. rex arms show that they were connected by significant amounts of muscle tissue: enough to lift or push nearly 400 kilograms. They would have had plenty of power to slash.
Secondly, the claws of T. rex show an unusual feature which would have made them very well-suited to slashing. Each arm has only two claws, as opposed to the three claws that are normal on smaller carnivorous dinosaurs. The reduced number of claws means that the power of the arm would be focused onto just two points, resulting in deeper cuts. And the curved claws themselves were 6 to 10 centimeters long, similar in size to the teeth of T. rex.
Thirdly, the length of the arms makes sense in terms of efficiency. The arms could have provided T. rex with the means to slash at prey held in its jaws. With the jaws holding the prey close, the arms would have been able to tear gashes over a meter long and several centimeters deep in just a few seconds. Longer or heavier arms might have done the job better, but they would have weighed more and cost T. rex too much energy to carry around.
The articles states, T. Rex arms were used for slashing attacks on the prey and provides three reason os support. However, the professor explains that may be they were used for slashing the prey, but that was not the primary purpose of the arms and refutes each of the reasons provided by the author.
Firstly, the reading claims that recent analysis of marks on the fossilized bones of T. Rex arms show that they were connected by significant amount of muscal tissue that would have plenty of power to slash attack. The professor refutes this point by saying, slashing by arms was not necessary for T. Rex's survival. He states that fossils found showed some repaired fractured marks on the arms. If the arms where necessary then those wounds would not have repaired after being damaged. Thus, arms were not required for food supply.
Secondly, the articles posits, the arms of T. rex only had two claws which helped in slashing by focusing the power to those two claws. However, the professor says that T. rex not required for claws because they alread had 30 cm teeths and highest bite force in the known history. Thus, only teeths were enough for catching and killing the prey.
Thirdly, the reading passage says that length of the arms are made of efficiently slashing the pred held in its jaws. The professor opposes this point by saying that although young T. rex would have used the arms for slashing the prey, the adult T. rex did not used them because they were too small for them. Hence, arms for adult T. rex did not utilized their arms for slashing the prey.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 14, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[1]
Message: You should probably use 'state'.
Suggestion: state
The articles states, T. Rex arms were used for slashing at...
^^^^^^
Line 1, column 33, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The articles states, T. Rex arms were used for slashing attacks on the pr...
^^
Line 1, column 153, Rule ID: MAY_BE[1]
Message: Did you mean 'maybe' (=perhaps)?
Suggestion: maybe
...t. However, the professor explains that may be they were used for slashing the prey, b...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 262, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'did' requires the base form of the verb: 'use'
Suggestion: use
...hing the prey, the adult T. rex did not used them because they were too small for th...
^^^^
Line 7, column 347, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'did' requires the base form of the verb: 'utilize'
Suggestion: utilize
...m. Hence, arms for adult T. rex did not utilized their arms for slashing the prey.
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 5.01324503311 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1302.0 1373.03311258 95% => OK
No of words: 278.0 270.72406181 103% => OK
Chars per words: 4.68345323741 5.08290768461 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08329915638 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.10858878869 2.5805825403 82% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.489208633094 0.540411800872 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 371.7 419.366225166 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.55342163355 84% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 13.0662251656 153% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 21.2450331126 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.0995589515 49.2860985944 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 65.1 110.228320801 59% => More chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 13.9 21.698381199 64% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.7 7.06452816374 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.27373068433 257% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.26507584975 0.272083759551 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0948098010006 0.0996497079465 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0754807781446 0.0662205650399 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.181213694784 0.162205337803 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.039193012812 0.0443174109184 88% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 7.6 13.3589403974 57% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 83.66 53.8541721854 155% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 4.8 11.0289183223 44% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 9.27 12.2367328918 76% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.12 8.42419426049 85% => OK
difficult_words: 50.0 63.6247240618 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.2 10.498013245 69% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 65.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.5 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.