The passage and lecture are both about the causes of Sea otters population decline. While the passage mentions environmental pollution as a possible explanation for this event, based on ongoing investigations, the lecture states that the real cause of Sea otters decline is related to predator attacks.
First, in the passage, the author mentions pollution as the most likely cause of Sea otters decline, using the oil rigs sources along Alaskan coast as an example. The author also mentions an increase of chemicals in water samples, which might be related to their deaths. On the other hand, the lecture refuses the pollution hypothesis pointing to the lack of dead Sea Otters on Alaskan beach coasts. Considering that no dead animals are found, the professor believes this supports the predator’s hypothesis since they eat their preys right away.
Second, the author talks about how the environmental pollution affects the whole ecosystem, causing the decline of other sea mammals in the same areas, which indicates that they are being as much affected as the otters. Nevertheless, in the lecture, the professor mentions that orcas rather hunt whales, but due to human hunters, these wales are disappearing. In light of this, orcas are forced to hunt what is available, creating a decline in all of the species mentioned in the passage.
Finally, the passage mentions scientist’s belief that pollution would explain an uneven pattern of Sea otters decline, due to the fact that other populations remained stable. In contrast to this, the lecturer states that predator’s hypothesis is a more likely reason for the pattern’s change since orcas are not able to hunt in all locations, such as shallow rocky locations.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 58, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'otters'' or 'otter's'?
Suggestion: otters'; otter's
...ecture are both about the causes of Sea otters population decline. While the passage m...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 445, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...hat is available, creating a decline in all of the species mentioned in the passage. F...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, nevertheless, second, so, while, in contrast, such as, in contrast to, 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: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 7.30242825607 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1468.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 278.0 270.72406181 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.28057553957 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08329915638 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86151022614 2.5805825403 111% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.535971223022 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 453.6 419.366225166 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
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: 43.6020698576 49.2860985944 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 133.454545455 110.228320801 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.2727272727 21.698381199 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.4545454545 7.06452816374 148% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => 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: 0.136484699214 0.272083759551 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0638681602442 0.0996497079465 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0651497532999 0.0662205650399 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0935616871142 0.162205337803 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0495427536836 0.0443174109184 112% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 13.3589403974 121% => 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: 13.64 12.2367328918 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.25 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 63.6247240618 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => 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.