Physical Sciences - Paleontoloty 2
In the lecture, the professor talked about Brachiosaurus’ habitat. Disputing the passage’s arguments that this particular dinosaur lived in water, she cited several pieces of evidence showing that it lived near water.
First, she said there was fossil evidence of Brachiosaurus’ footprints on land. The evidence shows that some sauropods walked on four feet in groups and youngsters may have to run on their hind legs to keep up with the adults. This evidence contradicts the claim in the passage that Brachiosaurus’ legs could not support their massive weight and had to rely on water buoyancy.
Second, the professor said Brachiosaurus can easily fed on land plants and thus did not depend on water plants as the passage argued. Anatomically similar to a giraffe, it had relatively long front legs, which allowed it to extend its neck upward with less effort. Moreover, even if it could only reach out its neck horizontally, there plenty of plants at its body height. What’s more, its long neck allowed it to cover a large surface area so it could easily devour a large quantity of food without having to move much.
Third, the professor dismissed the argument in the passage that Brachiosaurus lay submerged in water and used its nostrils to breathe. She cited the evidence of bone fossils indicating that these dinosaurs had narrow feet which were unfit for life in water. For a large animal to live in the lakes or swamps, the professor believed it needed to have broad feet like those of a hippopotamus to walk on the muddy bottom.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 53, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'can' requires the base form of the verb: 'feed'
Suggestion: feed
...professor said Brachiosaurus can easily fed on land plants and thus did not depend ...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, may, moreover, second, so, third, thus
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 2.0 10.4613686534 19% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1298.0 1373.03311258 95% => OK
No of words: 261.0 270.72406181 96% => OK
Chars per words: 4.97318007663 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0193898071 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75660846151 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.582375478927 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 397.8 419.366225166 95% => 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: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 27.7552547577 49.2860985944 56% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 108.166666667 110.228320801 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.75 21.698381199 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.08333333333 7.06452816374 58% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.9 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.55 12.2367328918 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 58.0 63.6247240618 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.