The reading and lecture both discuss the reasons behind the sea otter decline. While the reading states that the chemical pollution is the secret behind sea otter extinction, the professor refutes saying none of these claims are convincing.
Firstly, the reading avers that the industrial chemical toxin killed the sea otter. This is because that affect the sea otter ability to resist the life threatening infections. However, the professor argues this notion by saying that predation is the main cause of the sea otter declining. Moreover, the pollution theory is weakened by no one can find sea otter washed out on shores. On the other hand, the pardation strengthened by predator ate all the sea otter. So, there is no sea otter washed on the shore.
Secondly, the reading mentions that there are many other species like seals and sea lions had been affected due to the chemical pollution. So, the environmental disturbance affected the sea otter population. On the other hand, the professor questions this point by explaining that sea otters disappered because of water hunters. So, wheels started to hunt the small species. As a result, they ate the seals and the seal lions. Consequently, their population declined.
Lastly, the article states the sea otters declined in some areas and maintain the same at other places. This is because the water currents made unequal chemical concentration along the coast. Nevertheless, the professor contradicts this idea by pointing out that Orka predation different from one location to other. For instance, orka could access some places easily. So, the sea otter population declined quickly. However, Orka is very large creature and they could not go through the shallow areas. Consequently, the sea otter had not decline.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 538, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'declined'.
Suggestion: declined
...as. Consequently, the sea otter had not decline.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, moreover, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, then, while, for instance, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 5.01324503311 279% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1493.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 286.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.22027972028 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11236361783 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63243990256 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.520979020979 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 452.7 419.366225166 108% => 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: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 13.0662251656 161% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 21.2450331126 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.3656306118 49.2860985944 68% => OK
Chars per sentence: 71.0952380952 110.228320801 64% => OK
Words per sentence: 13.619047619 21.698381199 63% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.33333333333 7.06452816374 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.423811411029 0.272083759551 156% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.138108992004 0.0996497079465 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0623092660574 0.0662205650399 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.267591953183 0.162205337803 165% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.057191495328 0.0443174109184 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.0 13.3589403974 75% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.28 53.8541721854 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.4 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 63.6247240618 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.2 10.498013245 69% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.