Did bees (a type of insect) exist on Earth as early as 200 million years ago? Such a theory is supported by the discovery of very old fossil structures that resemble bee nests. The structures have been found inside 200- million-year-old fossilized trees in the state of Arizona in the southwestern United States. However, many skeptics doubt that the structures were created by bees. The skeptics support their view with several arguments.
No Fossils of Actual Bees
First, no fossil remains of actual bees have ever been found that date to 200 million years ago. The earliest preserved body of a bee is 100 million years old—only half as old as the fossilized structures discovered in Arizona.
Absence of Flowering Plants
A second reason to doubt that bees existed 200 million years ago is the absence of flowering plants in that period. Today's bees feed almost exclusively on the flowers of flowering plants; in fact, bees and flowering plants have evolved a close, mutually dependent biological relationship. Flowering plants, however, first appeared on Earth 125 million years ago. Given the bees’ close association with flowering plants, it is unlikely bees could have existed before that time.
Structures Lack Some Details
Third, while the fossilized structures found in Arizona are somewhat similar to nest chambers made by modern bees, they lack some of the finer details of bees’ nests. For example, chambers of modern bee nests are closed by caps that have a spiral pattern, but the fossilized chambers lack such caps. That suggests the fossilized structures were made by other insects, such as wood-boring beetles.
The reading and the lecture both discuss the bees'. The article states that there is no evidence of bees' existence around 200 million years ago and it provides three plausible explanations for that. However, the lecture contrast with specific points made in the reading passage and says that there are possibilities of bees' existence and elaborates hereunder.
The first point the professor makes that the bees' could not be preserved due to lack of the tree which makes the sticky resin substance to preserve the bees'. He adds the point that the tree with sticky resin was not available 200 million years ago, so the evidence of bees' fossils existence was not recorded. This point contrasts the point made in the reading that bees' fossils are not found dated to 200 million years ago.
Secondly, to illustrate, he explains that early bees' might be feeding on non-flowering plants such as ferns or pines. In addition, he says that flowering plants might not be available for the bees' to feed during 200 million years ago. Furthermore, he adds that bees' have adapted to flowering plants when they evolved and continuing the same source thereafter until now. On the other hand, the reading states that without the evidence of flowering plants during the time, the existence of bees' is unconvincing.
Finally, the tutor mentions that there is chemical evidence that the bees' structure was found with a special waterproofing substance. Moreover, the same kind of waterproof material is found in modern bees' structures too. Thus, representing as bees' chambers. This point contrasts with the reading key point. According to the reading, though the structure looks similar, they lack minute details when compared to the modern bees' nests. For instance, they lack the caps of the bees' chamber, which is the pattern present in modern bees' nests.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, furthermore, however, if, look, moreover, second, secondly, so, thus, for instance, in addition, kind of, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 5.01324503311 239% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1540.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 304.0 270.72406181 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06578947368 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17559525986 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53903050401 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.467105263158 0.540411800872 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 445.5 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.1149576938 49.2860985944 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.25 110.228320801 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0 21.698381199 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.25 7.06452816374 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => 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: 10.0 4.27373068433 234% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.310414935445 0.272083759551 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.110806472844 0.0996497079465 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0834979251789 0.0662205650399 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.191745780145 0.162205337803 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0491785738059 0.0443174109184 111% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.3589403974 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.2367328918 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.96 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.