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 and lecture are both about the causes of the decline in the Sea otter. The author feels that pollution hypothesis seemed the more likely cause of the decline of Sea otters. Nevertheless, the lecturer challenges the claim made by the author. He is of the opinion that attack by predators hypothesis seemed the more likely cause of the reduction in the sea otters. The lecturer cast doubt on the main point made in the reading by providing three reasons.
To begin with, the author argues that there were known sources of pollution such as oil rigs along the Alaskan coast; furthermore, he feels that water samples from such area revealed an increased level of chemicals that could decrease the sea otters; however, this argument is challenged by the lecture. He claims that if pollution is the main reason for the decline in sea otters, then why fossils are not found in these areas. This shows that predators are the reasons for the decline in sea otters.
Secondly, the reading states that other sea mammals, such as sea lions along with the Alaskan coast were also declining. He believes that pollution affects the entire ecosystem rather than a single species; nonetheless, the lecturer rebut by mentioning that sea otters hunted by whales for their food, but due to human hunted whales; whales went from that coast. Thus, they now hunted other sea mammals like sea lions.
finally, the author posits that pollution theory could explain the uneven pattern of otter decline; howbeit, the lecturer believes that sea otters depend on the location where lives are accessible to forces. He feels that due to the large size of sea otters, they can not access shallow location; therefore, predators attack is the best theory that could explain the not even pattern of otter' population reduction
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 290, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'predators'' or 'predator's'?
Suggestion: predators'; predator's
...or. He is of the opinion that attack by predators hypothesis seemed the more likely cause...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Finally
... other sea mammals like sea lions. finally, the author posits that pollution theor...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, furthermore, however, if, nevertheless, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, such as, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1517.0 1373.03311258 110% => OK
No of words: 304.0 270.72406181 112% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99013157895 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.17559525986 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.33685099572 2.5805825403 91% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 145.348785872 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.506578947368 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 458.1 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.9444858137 49.2860985944 150% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.692307692 110.228320801 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.3846153846 21.698381199 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.7692307692 7.06452816374 152% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.241254963682 0.272083759551 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0959528710327 0.0996497079465 96% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0548814887389 0.0662205650399 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.151357398384 0.162205337803 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0433843707926 0.0443174109184 98% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 53.8541721854 105% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.41 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25 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.