tpo 43
The reading provides three possible theories about how Agnostids lived. However, the lecturer finds all the ideas dubious and provides some reasons to refute them all.
First, the author argues that this kind of animal may have been predators and hunted other smaller animals. Conversely, the lecturer casts doubt on this idea by stating that the Agnostids did not have a well-developed eyes, and so, they could not be good hunters, because good arthropods hunter use their great vision to locate their prey. Moreover, she states that there is no other special sign about other developed sense of these animal in their fossils to help them during hunting. As a result, they could not be free-swimming predators.
Furthermore, the reading passage holds the view that they may have leaved on the seafloor and ate other animals` dead body or different kind of bacteria. In the contrast, the professor underlines the fact that these animals could not be seafloor dweller because animals which habitat on the seafloors occupied small areas and they cannot move fast from one place to other location. But, the Agnostids widespread different location and they could move fast from one region to another, so, they could not be seafloor dwellers.
Finally, the reading argues that these animals could be a group of parasites and eat from larger animals. On the contrary, the speaker dismisses this issue due to the fact that the population of parasites is small because otherwise they could damage their host organism. As result a species such as the Agnostids with their large population could not be parasites and this theory is completely ruled of.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 218, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'eye'?
Suggestion: eye
...Agnostids did not have a well-developed eyes, and so, they could not be good hunters...
^^^^
Line 2, column 277, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'arthropods'' or 'arthropod's'?
Suggestion: arthropods'; arthropod's
...could not be good hunters, because good arthropods hunter use their great vision to locate...
^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['but', 'conversely', 'finally', 'first', 'furthermore', 'however', 'if', 'may', 'moreover', 'so', 'well', 'kind of', 'such as', 'as a result', 'on the contrary']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.228476821192 0.261695866417 87% => OK
Verbs: 0.132450331126 0.158904122519 83% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0927152317881 0.0723426182421 128% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0596026490066 0.0435111971325 137% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0496688741722 0.0277247811725 179% => OK
Prepositions: 0.112582781457 0.128828473217 87% => OK
Participles: 0.0165562913907 0.0370669169778 45% => Some participles wanted.
Conjunctions: 2.49254822756 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0198675496689 0.0208969081088 95% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.00154638098197 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.115894039735 0.128158765124 90% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0364238410596 0.0158828679856 229% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00662251655629 0.0114777025283 58% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1651.0 1645.83664459 100% => OK
No of words: 271.0 271.125827815 100% => OK
Chars per words: 6.09225092251 6.08160592843 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05734859645 4.04852973271 100% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.346863468635 0.374372842146 93% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.269372693727 0.287516216867 94% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.191881918819 0.187439937562 102% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.125461254613 0.113142543107 111% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.49254822756 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 145.348785872 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.546125461255 0.539623497131 101% => OK
Word variations: 54.6351558413 53.8517498576 101% => OK
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0529801325 92% => OK
Sentence length: 22.5833333333 21.7502111507 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.4220982877 49.3711431718 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 137.583333333 132.220823453 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5833333333 21.7502111507 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.25 0.878197800319 142% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.39072847682 59% => OK
Readability: 49.520602706 50.5018328374 98% => OK
Elegance: 1.47945205479 1.90840788429 78% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.552538556823 0.549887131256 100% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.136342156176 0.142949733639 95% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.103010014402 0.0787303798458 131% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.610753098323 0.631733273073 97% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.136671439251 0.139662658121 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.244023522328 0.266732575781 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0807682528175 0.103435571967 78% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.314858133072 0.414875509568 76% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.129289615293 0.0530846634433 244% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.365544617242 0.40443939384 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0821711131889 0.0528353158467 156% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.26048565121 70% => OK
Positive topic words: 1.0 3.49668874172 29% => More positive topic words wanted.
Negative topic words: 6.0 3.62251655629 166% => OK
Neutral topic words: 1.0 3.1766004415 31% => OK
Total topic words: 8.0 10.2958057395 78% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 86.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.