TPO43 integrated
The author of the reading passage demonstrates three different theories about how agnostids lived or behaved, while the lecturer in the lecture is opposed to all of them.
To begin with, the author claims that agnostids could be free-swimming predators hunting smaller animals. Yet the lecturer refutes that it is true that they were skilled swimmers, but the lack of large eyes prevents them from being strong predators. As we know, vision is one of the most important ability for a predator to detect their preys acutely and effectively, while all the primitive agnostids owed are tiny and poor developed eyes, and worse still, they might be blind sometimes. Therefore, some special senses are necessary for agnostids to prey if the first hypothesis is correct, which, however, has not been proved by any fossil evidence.
Moreover, the author believes that the seafloor may have been where the agnostids dwelled. On the contrary, the lecturer rebuts that typical seafloor dwellers can only move slowly and live locally, and therefore they usually occupy a small area rather than spreading to new ones. However, many agnostids inhabited multiple areas that cover great distances. This indicates that they were able to move fast and far, which is a highly unusual ability for common seafloor dwellers.
Finally, the author puts forward that it is possible that agnostids were parasites. Instead, the lecturer retorts that the fact that agnostids had large population rules out such a possibility. Parasites, living on larger organisms, are considerably limited in population not only because the fierce inter-species competition for resources but also because too many of them can kill the host subsequently. But many agnostids species that scientists have found are vast fossil individuals, which makes it impossible for them to exist as parasites.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-10-05 | Aliakbari94 | 70 | view |
| 2021-03-02 | taisuke571 | 85 | view |
| 2020-10-31 | nj-me | 70 | view |
| 2020-10-25 | 想不到一个好名字 | 80 | view |
| 2019-11-29 | yqkqknct | 80 | view |
- TPO 50 integrated 3
- TPO49 integrated 85
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?The ability to maintain friendships with a small number of people over a long period of time is more important for happiness than the ability to make many new friends easily.Use specific reasons and ex 90
- TPO29 integrated 86
- To be an effective leader, a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards. 83
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, moreover, so, still, therefore, well, while, it is true, on the contrary, to begin with
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 : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 21.0 30.3222958057 69% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1568.0 1373.03311258 114% => OK
No of words: 294.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.33333333333 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14082457966 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68657534323 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 145.348785872 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.62925170068 0.540411800872 116% => OK
syllable_count: 490.5 419.366225166 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.51434878587 330% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.6397212698 49.2860985944 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 120.615384615 110.228320801 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6153846154 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.1538461538 7.06452816374 144% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.43415566087 0.272083759551 160% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.147756311883 0.0996497079465 148% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0578803405228 0.0662205650399 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.240144258679 0.162205337803 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0488401099021 0.0443174109184 110% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 13.3589403974 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 53.8541721854 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.0289183223 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.93 12.2367328918 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.29 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 85.0 63.6247240618 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.