The reading and the lecture both try to explain why the otter population has declined along the western coast of North America. While the former states that this depletion has been provoked by pollution, the latter posits that a predator theory is more likely to cause this phenomenon.
First and foremost, it is mentioned in the passage that pollutants have caused the death of many otters. Evidence of this is oil rings and other sources of industrial chemical pollution. On the other hand, the lecturer questions this fact due to the reason that no one has seen dead otters in the coasts. The professor implies that predators don't leave the body of their prey - in this case, the otters - on the coast, and this fact is proof of the predator theory.
Second, the passage indicates that not only otters have been affected by pollution, but also other mammals have declined, such as seals and sea lions. However, the professor refutes this statement saying that orcas, which usually hunt whales, are now hunting sea otters. This phenomenon is because hunters have provoked the depletion of the whale’s population, and consequently, orcas are adapting by eating other mammals. Additionally, she points out that other mammals - such as sea lions - have also decreased their population.
Third, the reading attributes the uneven pattern of decline in otters population to the different concentrations of pollutants along the coast. On the other hand, the lecturer also associates this fact to the theory predation. She elaborates on the point that whales, which eat otters, cannot access the shallow or rocky places where otters live. As a result, there are more otters in the areas that are not accessible by whales.
In summary, the lecture - with its theory of predation - refutes the passage by providing compelling evidence that refutes each one of the three main reasons to explain the depletion in sea otters population.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 343, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...s. The professor implies that predators dont leave the body of their prey - in this ...
^^^^
Line 9, column 191, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'otters'' or 'otter's'?
Suggestion: otters'; otter's
...reasons to explain the depletion in sea otters population.
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, however, if, second, so, third, while, in summary, such as, as a result, 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: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 16.0 5.01324503311 319% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1621.0 1373.03311258 118% => OK
No of words: 316.0 270.72406181 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.12974683544 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21620550194 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60608602095 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.522151898734 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 496.8 419.366225166 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.1523384591 49.2860985944 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.066666667 110.228320801 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0666666667 21.698381199 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.13333333333 7.06452816374 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.158732200293 0.272083759551 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0613334602686 0.0996497079465 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0697110522528 0.0662205650399 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.101551828704 0.162205337803 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0602380638 0.0443174109184 136% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.68 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 63.6247240618 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.