how agnostids behaved and what they ate
Both the reading and the lecture are about Agnostids. The author of the reading passage feels that there are three possible explanations for the assertion of how Agnostids behaved and what they ate; however, the professor finds the ideas dubious and casts doubt on the hypotheses proposed by the writer of the text.
To begin with, the author mentions that Agnostids were free-swimming predators, for as it is said in the article, there were other types of primitive arthropods, who were strong swimmers and active predator, as a result it is possible that Agnotids lived the same way. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. He brings up the idea that in order to be a swimming predator, animals would need a well-developed vision or other special sensory organs in order to chase the prey, but since Agnostids had poor eyesight and might even be blind, they lacked such feature to behave that way.
Secondly, the writer holds the view that it is of the likelihood that Agnostids were seafloor dwellers, as there were other types of primitive arthropods living this way. In contrast, the speaker rebuts this hypothesis by underlying the fact that seafloor dwellers cannot swim fast and for long distances. As a result, they occupy specific areas on the seafloor and live there, yet there were lots of sites, where agnostids' remains were found.
Finally, the author posits that it is plausible to think that Agnostids were parasites, living on and feeding off larger organisms. On the contrary, the professor dismisses this issue due to the fact that the population of the parasites should be limited to survive, for in case it increases, it can end up in killing the host organism. Additionally, she notes that since there were vast amounts of fossilized Agnostid individuals, the chances are that they did not play the role of the parasites.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, however, if, second, secondly, so, well, in contrast, as a result, on the contrary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 10.4613686534 191% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1552.0 1373.03311258 113% => OK
No of words: 312.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 4.97435897436 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20279927342 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63730250078 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.548076923077 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 480.6 419.366225166 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 74.4510488689 49.2860985944 151% => OK
Chars per sentence: 141.090909091 110.228320801 128% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.3636363636 21.698381199 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0909090909 7.06452816374 143% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.233710776089 0.272083759551 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0772165617259 0.0996497079465 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.10093966376 0.0662205650399 152% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.148184759035 0.162205337803 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0983314229906 0.0443174109184 222% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.3589403974 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 53.8541721854 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.0289183223 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.84 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.18 8.42419426049 109% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 63.6247240618 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.5 10.7273730684 163% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.