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 passage and the lecture are both about fossilized structures discovered inside trees that date to 200 million years ago in the state of Arizona. The author introduces arguments that the structures could not be for bees' nests. The lecturer, on the other hand, refutes the claims made in the article. She mentions that it's perfectly possible that the fossils are actually for bees and asserts that the proposals in the article are not convincing.
First of all, the author believes that no fossils for bees have been found that are 200 million years old and the only fossils we have are only a hundred million years old, which is half as old as the unearthed structures. However, the lecturer challenges this idea. She contends that a specific tree resins were needed for bees to be fossilized and this type of trees was rare 200 million years ago. As a result, very few bees structures were preserved as fossils. Nevertheless, once this kind of trees became common, more nests started to get fossilized in that resin.
Secondly, the author holds that flowering plants have evolved only 125 million years ago. Given the close association between bees and flowering plants, it's not possible that bees existed 200 million years ago. Conversely, the lecturer points out that bees could have fed on non-flowering plants first such as ferns and pine trees before the evolution of flowering plants. Furthermore, the speaker explains that the mutual relationship between bees and flowering plants could have been formed later.
Lastly, the writer maintains that the fossilized structures were made by other insects, such as wood-boring beetles because they lack some details like the spiral cap that is characteristic to modern bees' nests. In contrast, the lecturer brings up the fact that a water-proofing chemical used by modern bees in their nests has been found in the structures. Hence, this piece of evidence supports the idea that the structures were, in fact, for bees as the chemical composition was verified.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 239, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...structures could not be for bees nests. The lecturer, on the other hand, refutes th...
^^^
Line 5, column 136, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'been'.
Suggestion: been
... years old and the only fossils we have are only a hundred million years old, which...
^^^
Line 5, column 572, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tarted to get fossilized in that resin. Secondly, the author holds that flowerin...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, conversely, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, lastly, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, in contrast, in fact, kind of, such as, as a result, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 12.0772626932 149% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1706.0 1373.03311258 124% => OK
No of words: 334.0 270.72406181 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10778443114 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27500489853 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59567024752 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.497005988024 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 501.3 419.366225166 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.0835454574 49.2860985944 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.625 110.228320801 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.875 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.875 7.06452816374 168% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.490977643944 0.272083759551 180% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.148279215376 0.0996497079465 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.111510221809 0.0662205650399 168% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.286652623461 0.162205337803 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.102805060843 0.0443174109184 232% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 13.3589403974 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.94 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.