This reading claims that the amount of sea otters is declining because of the environmental pollution, while the lecture contends that their predators are the most likely cause of their declining. This lecture actually provides three reasons to explain it.
First of all, investigation of the water sample in this reading indicates that the chemicals in the sample may cause sea otters to decrease, while according to this lecture, no one can find any real dead sea otters washed out to the beach, which is contrary to the results if the chemicals' theory is true. However, their predators could eat otters to leave no bodies.
Additionally, the reading claims that the environmental pollution could also explain the large amount of death of the other small animals, but the predators could choose larger mammals to eat. In the contrary, the lecture reputes it and says if the sea otters are declining, their predators need to change their diets, which leads to the death of smaller mammals.
At last, the reading mentions that there is a phenomenon of uneven concentration of pollutants. However, we find out in the lecture that ocres are not accessible to the location in shallow places so that the ocres cannot hunt the mammals in the shallow location where is exactly the same as the distribution of where no other dead animals exist.
In conclusion, the lecture insists the opinion that sea otters decline because of the large predators, which is different from the position of the reading that sea otters are killed by chemical pollution, and explain it from three above reasons.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 281, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'chemicals'' or 'chemical's'?
Suggestion: chemicals'; chemical's
...which is contrary to the results if the chemicals theory is true. However, their predator...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, however, if, may, so, while, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1332.0 1373.03311258 97% => OK
No of words: 265.0 270.72406181 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.02641509434 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03470204552 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60093911895 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 128.0 145.348785872 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.483018867925 0.540411800872 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 405.0 419.366225166 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 29.0 21.2450331126 137% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 82.2475936831 49.2860985944 167% => OK
Chars per sentence: 148.0 110.228320801 134% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.4444444444 21.698381199 136% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.33333333333 7.06452816374 132% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 4.33554083885 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.311047764911 0.272083759551 114% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.127229868442 0.0996497079465 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0715241698004 0.0662205650399 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.176975124278 0.162205337803 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.055470557109 0.0443174109184 125% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.0 13.3589403974 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.5 53.8541721854 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.0289183223 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.49 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.41 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 63.6247240618 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.498013245 130% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.