Agnostid which was a group of marine animal extincting 450 million years ago, is the topic of discussion. We don't know much about how agnostids lived and how they behaved. The reading passage tries to introduce three hypotheses about how they lived. On the other hand, the lecturer challenges all of them and brings up counterclaims by talking about the weaknesses of each assumption.
First, the reading passage proposes the idea that agnostids were predators. And as we know agnostids were primitive arthropods-relatives of modern-day insects, for a proof the reading passage points to other primitive arthropods who were active predators. However, the lecturer points to the fact that predators had very big eyes to help them chase after the prey while we know agnostids didn't have a good eyesight and some of them were even blind. What is more, they didn't have any other organ to help them track the prey. Therefore, the hypothesis doesn't sound probable.
Next, the reading passage suggests another probibility that agnostids were seafloor dwellers scavenging dead organisms or grazing on bacteria. As a proof, the author points to other primitive arthropods again. Yet, the lecturer discusses that seafloor dwellers couldn't move fast and were localized in a small geographical area rather than spreading in large ones. On the contrary, we know that agnostids were very quick traveling large distances and spreading in large areas. As a consequent, the probability is unlikely.
As a final hypothesis, the reading passage states the possibility of agnostids being parasites considering many species of modern-day arthropods living as parasites. However, the lecturer mentions the small population of parasites living on large organisms. As a matter of fact, living large population of parasites on an organism, how could it survive? Thus, we come to conclusion that this conjecture is not acceptable either.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 110, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...ars ago, is the topic of discussion. We dont know much about how agnostids lived and...
^^^^
Line 2, column 388, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
... after the prey while we know agnostids didnt have a good eyesight and some of them w...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 468, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...hem were even blind. What is more, they didnt have any other organ to help them track...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 550, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ack the prey. Therefore, the hypothesis doesnt sound probable. Next, the reading pass...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 261, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...cturer discusses that seafloor dwellers couldnt move fast and were localized in a small...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, so, therefore, thus, well, while, talking about, as a matter of fact, on the contrary, what is more, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => 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: 1615.0 1373.03311258 118% => OK
No of words: 302.0 270.72406181 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.34768211921 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1687104957 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91140960083 2.5805825403 113% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.546357615894 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 498.6 419.366225166 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.1380060747 49.2860985944 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.7222222222 110.228320801 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.7777777778 21.698381199 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.44444444444 7.06452816374 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.27373068433 234% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.465275862753 0.272083759551 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.132254272119 0.0996497079465 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0951477315185 0.0662205650399 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.26552057388 0.162205337803 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0631166706781 0.0443174109184 142% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.45 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.