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.
Based on the given materials, the article as well as the lecure discusses existance of bees as long as 200 million years according to the fossilis found in Arizona. The writer states that the fossils might not actually represent bees. The author provides several ideas to repudiate this claim.
Initially, it is alleged in the reading that there is no fossil of actual bees dated back to more than 100 million years so the bees are half as old as 200 million years. However, the lecturer asserts that the lack of fossils of actual bees might be due to lack of trees around that time which could preserve bees. She alludes to the fact that most bee fossils are found in a substance called resin so since they were not common, no bee fossils are found.
Second, the writer proclaims that flowering plants did not existed 200 million years ago while bees are in close assosiation with them and as a result highly dependent on them. Yet again, the speaker underscores that although now a days bees feed on flower plants but they could feed on other type of plants like pine trees. After the advent of flowering plants, bees could have adopted and found their food on flowering plants.
The last point of contention between the listening and the reading passages is lack of a structure in fossils of nests comparing to bees nests. The lecturer states that modern nestes are closed by a cap which can not be found in the fossils. On the other hand, the author points out that albeit they lack such structure but chemical analysis shows that the fossils had benefited from a chemical to make the nest water proof just like a modern bee nest.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 60, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'did' requires the base form of the verb: 'exist'
Suggestion: exist
...proclaims that flowering plants did not existed 200 million years ago while bees are in...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 227, Rule ID: NOW_A_DAYS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'nowadays'?
Suggestion: nowadays
..., the speaker underscores that although now a days bees feed on flower plants but they cou...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 413, Rule ID: EN_COMPOUNDS
Message: This word is normally spelled as one.
Suggestion: waterproof
...efited from a chemical to make the nest water proof just like a modern bee nest.
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, however, second, so, well, while, as to, as a result, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1358.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 292.0 270.72406181 108% => OK
Chars per words: 4.65068493151 5.08290768461 91% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13376432452 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.2073080142 2.5805825403 86% => OK
Unique words: 158.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.541095890411 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 398.7 419.366225166 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.2261494931 49.2860985944 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.166666667 110.228320801 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3333333333 21.698381199 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.16666666667 7.06452816374 116% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.371146008798 0.272083759551 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.122961744314 0.0996497079465 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.088915468883 0.0662205650399 134% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.204285897115 0.162205337803 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0625410797441 0.0443174109184 141% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 64.04 53.8541721854 119% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.99 12.2367328918 82% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.96 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 58.0 63.6247240618 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => 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.