The lecture and the passage both deal with the existence of did bees 200 million years ago. While the passage offers several reasons for the absence of this insect, the lecture casts doubt on the accuracy of each statement. The disparities will be explored in the following paragraphs.
First, the passage contends that there was no fossil relic of bees on that time and the earliest bee was detected 100 million years ago. The lecture, on the contrary, opposes this argument by saying that the fossil of bees was dependent on a kind of tree which was able to produce resin and that sort of trees were scarce and rare. After a while, when these trees became common, this insect started to fossilized. Thus, the absence of fossilized bone does not mean that the insect could not have existed.
Second, the reading passage states that bees are dependent on flowering plants and there was not any flowering plants 200 million years ago. Conversely, the lecture rebuts this statement by explaining that earlier bees could have been able to feed on non-flowering plants such as fern and pine trees. When flowering plants started to evolve, this insect tried to adapt itself to feed on these kinds of plants.
Third, the passage presents that the structure of bees was void of some details. For instance, while chambers of modern bees have caps the chamber of ancient bees lack caps. Therefore, there is not close relationship between them. The lecturer, is at odds with this idea by asserting that these bees had chemical evidence. They protect their nest by generating waterproof materials and these chemical substances can be seen in modern bees. Thus, this fossilized structure and bone were produced by bees.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, first, second, so, therefore, third, thus, while, for instance, kind of, sort of, such as, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1424.0 1373.03311258 104% => OK
No of words: 289.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92733564014 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.38223671859 2.5805825403 92% => OK
Unique words: 153.0 145.348785872 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.529411764706 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 424.8 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.25165562914 399% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.0067033624 49.2860985944 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.0 110.228320801 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.0625 21.698381199 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.6875 7.06452816374 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.27373068433 257% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0944544014664 0.272083759551 35% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0368506448622 0.0996497079465 37% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0221448403187 0.0662205650399 33% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0629288339256 0.162205337803 39% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0158299038498 0.0443174109184 36% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.8 13.3589403974 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.02 12.2367328918 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.92 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 63.6247240618 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.