Sea otters are a small mammal that lives in the waters along North America's west coast from California to Alaska. A few years ago some of the sea otter populations off of the Alaskan coast started to decline rapidly and raised several concerns because of their important role in the coastal ecosystem. Experts began investigating and came up with two possible explanations. One explanation was environmental pollution and the second was attacks by predators.
At first it seemed as if the pollution was the most likely cause for the population decline. One reason pollution was more likely was because of the known pollution sources along the Alaskan coast such as oil rigs. Also water samples taken in the area showed increased levels of chemicals that could decrease the otters' immune systems and indirectly result in their deaths.
Another thing that pointed to pollution as the culprit was the decline of other sea mammals such as seals in the same areas. This indicated that whatever was affecting the otters was also affecting the other sea mammals. Environmental pollution usually affects an entire ecosystem instead of just one species. Only predators that occurred in a large area, such as orcas (a large predatory whale), could cause the same effect, but they usually hunt larger prey.
Finally, scientists believed the pollution hypothesis would also explain the uneven pattern of otter decline. In some Alaskan locations the otter population declined greatly while other populations remained stable. Some experts suggested this could be explained by ocean currents, or other environmental factor, might have created uneven concentrations of pollutants along the coast.
The reading passage and the lecturer both talk about the possible cause for the decline in the sea otter population. The author argues that the pollution has caused the decline, while the lecturer thinks that it was predation that was responsible for the decline.
Firstly, according to the reading passage, the increased concentration of chemicals in the water samples could have decreased the immunity of the otters and indirectly result in their death. However, the lecturer challenges this argument by stating that the lack of dead sea otters came for washing at the Alaskian beaches which cannot be because of the infections. Additionally, when a predator kills an otter it is eaten right away and cannot wash up at the shore.
Secondly, the author suggests that any environmental factor that was affecting otters was also affecting was also affecting the other sea mammals, as a result, population of other sea mammals such as seals was also detrimenting. However, the lecturer disputes this argument, as he thinks that because of absence of whales, orcas started preying on other small sea mammals leading to an overall decline in their population.
Lastly, the text puts forth the idea that the uneven pattern of otter decline can be explained by the pollution theory. However, the lecturer asserts that the uneven pattern can be explained by the accessibility of the predators. To bolster his claims he provides an example of shally rocky location where orcas can't access its prey, which results in the stable population of otters in those areas.
In conclusion, both passage and the lecturer talks about different factor that might be affecting the population of otters but the lecturer challenges all claims made by the passage.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 313, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...le of shally rocky location where orcas cant access its prey, which results in the s...
^^^^
Line 9, column 88, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...lks about different factor that might be affecting the population of otters but t...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, while, in conclusion, such as, as a result
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 : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.01324503311 259% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1470.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 284.0 270.72406181 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.17605633803 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66325701147 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 146.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.514084507042 0.540411800872 95% => OK
syllable_count: 451.8 419.366225166 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => 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: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.6701274042 49.2860985944 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.636363636 110.228320801 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.8181818182 21.698381199 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.1818181818 7.06452816374 144% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.176102367342 0.272083759551 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0692960981085 0.0996497079465 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0436219397662 0.0662205650399 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0944042070073 0.162205337803 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.036305049509 0.0443174109184 82% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 13.3589403974 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 53.8541721854 86% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.0289183223 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.77 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => 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.