tpo 43
In term of how the agnostids which are a group of marine animals that became extinct about 450 million years ago, have lived, the author and the lecturer, contradict each other. The author in the article states three theories about how the agnostids may have lived, on the contrary, the professor in the lecture refute each theory and asserts that unfortunately, all theories which stated by the author are unconvincing.
First, the author claims that the agnostids may have been a free-swimming predator and hunted smaller praise because other types of the agnostids were strong swimmers and predators. in contrast, the professor rejects this theory and states that all predators in the open ocean have large eyes which help them to track prey very well but the agnostids were pretty blind animals and they could not be a predator. although, they probably had other special sensory.
secondly, the article asserts that the arthropods were seafloor inhabitant since other types of agnostids living in this way. the lecturer cast doubt toward this theory and claims that seafloor animal should be move fast and far and they dwell in the small geography location but the arthropods there were in the multiple geography places and they could not move fast thus, this theory is unusual about them.
Finally, the author contends that the agnostids maybe were parasites and living and feeding on other larger animals because there are many species which are parasites such as flea and mites. on the contrary, the speaker impugns this claim and states that parasites population are not very large and they are a limit due to killing off host but the population of the agnostids is too large and there are vast fossil records about these animals. Hence, this fact rules out this theory which the agnostids are parasites.
in the nutshell, according to the aforementioned reasons, the lecturer refutes all theory which stated by authors.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 182, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: In
...ids were strong swimmers and predators. in contrast, the professor rejects this th...
^^
Line 2, column 411, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Although
...imals and they could not be a predator. although, they probably had other special sensor...
^^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 411, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “although” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...imals and they could not be a predator. although, they probably had other special sensor...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Secondly
...ey probably had other special sensory. secondly, the article asserts that the arthropod...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 126, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
... types of agnostids living in this way. the lecturer cast doubt toward this theory ...
^^^
Line 4, column 191, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: On
...h are parasites such as flea and mites. on the contrary, the speaker impugns this ...
^^
Line 4, column 255, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'parasites'' or 'parasite's'?
Suggestion: parasites'; parasite's
...aker impugns this claim and states that parasites population are not very large and they ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: In
...ory which the agnostids are parasites. in the nutshell, according to the aforemen...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, hence, may, second, secondly, so, thus, well, in contrast, such as, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 7.30242825607 260% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1614.0 1373.03311258 118% => OK
No of words: 319.0 270.72406181 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05956112853 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22617688928 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.41119430186 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.479623824451 0.540411800872 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 493.2 419.366225166 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => 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: 29.0 21.2450331126 137% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 72.0984175845 49.2860985944 146% => OK
Chars per sentence: 146.727272727 110.228320801 133% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.0 21.698381199 134% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.45454545455 7.06452816374 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 4.19205298013 191% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.448654968735 0.272083759551 165% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.188053080434 0.0996497079465 189% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.112506713436 0.0662205650399 170% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.235205080139 0.162205337803 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.12716845127 0.0443174109184 287% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.9 13.3589403974 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.5 53.8541721854 94% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.0289183223 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.66 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.5 10.7273730684 163% => 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.