tpo 43 the agnostids
The material discusses how agnostids ate and lived. While the reading claims three theories to explain that, the listening disagrees and mentions that all three theories have serious weaknesses.
First, the author states that agnostids were free-swimming hunters like other primitive arthropods. On the other hand, the professor opposes this and posits that arthropods which were strong predators had large and well-developed eyes because vision is very crucial to hunt tiny animals. However, the lecturer adds that agnostids had very tiny and poorly developed eyes and some of them were completely blind. The speaker explains that if they had the ability tho chase other animals, they should have other special organs, but there is no evidence for that.
Second, the writer states that agnostids were seafloor dwellers. On the contrary, the lecturer challenges this and contends that usually seafloor dwellers do not have the ability to move fast and far. The professor explains that they move slowly, so they stay localized and occupy small geographic areas. Nevertheless, the speaker says that agnostids were found in multiple geographic areas, and there is a large distance between one area and others. The professor states that they moved fast from one area to another one, which is unusual for seafloor dwellers.
Third, the reading mentions that agnostids were parasites. Conversely, the professor contradicts this and cits that the parasites' population should not be large, but they have to stay on a certain limit. The lecturer explains that if they are too many, they could kill the host. The speaker adds that agnostids populations were very large, and from each species there were a vast amount of fossils. The lecturer concludes that this information roul out that agnostids were parasites.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 121, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'parasites'' or 'parasite's'?
Suggestion: parasites'; parasite's
...ssor contradicts this and cits that the parasites population should not be large, but the...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 400, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...es there were a vast amount of fossils. The lecturer concludes that this informatio...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, so, third, well, while, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 7.30242825607 205% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 20.0 12.0772626932 166% => OK
Pronoun: 31.0 22.412803532 138% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 16.0 30.3222958057 53% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1524.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 286.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.32867132867 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11236361783 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53902255451 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.520979020979 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 457.2 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 16.0 8.23620309051 194% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.0893663164 49.2860985944 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.25 110.228320801 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.875 21.698381199 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.3125 7.06452816374 104% => 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 : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.396436917639 0.272083759551 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.144658297969 0.0996497079465 145% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0738100592558 0.0662205650399 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.23231578212 0.162205337803 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0628155826033 0.0443174109184 142% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.34 12.2367328918 109% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => 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.