Recent incursions by deep-sea fishermen into the habitat of the Madagascan shrimp have led to a significant reduction in the species population. With the breeding season fast approaching, the number of shrimp should soon begin to increase. Nonetheless, the population should not return to the levels before the fishing boats arrived. Because this trend is expected to continue over the next several years, the Madagascan shrimp will quickly become an endangered species.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The author assumes at the beginning of the arguement that the reduction in the population of the shrimp is due to the recent incursions of the deep-sea fishermen. There are no other reasons specified that might have also resulted to this outcome. It is entirely possible that the decrease in the population could have been caused by a recent change in the climate of the habitat. It is also possible that due to increase in the population of predators of shrimps increased in the habitat. Without discarding other possible reasons for this decrease the assertion that fishermen were solely to blame doesn't look cogent.
Further the autor fails to elucidate on how a decrease in the shrimp population was established. In particular, the arguement also doesnt state if the population study has been considered from previous years to determine this decrease. It is possible that the shrimp population remained the same at this period of time in the previous years as well. It is also possible that due to the flaws in the techniques used to determine the shrimp population has led to this conclusion. Without the information of the shrimp population throughout a certain period of time earlier to the recent study and withouth the knowledge of the techniques used, it is not wise to arrive at the conclusion of reduction in the population.
The author further assumes that this trend is expected to continue. There is however no reason stated for this claim. It is possible that the Madagascan shrimp was not preffered by many in their diet. And it is possible that the deep-sea fishermen no longer find it economically viable to capture the Madagascan shrimp in which case one may not expect the same trend to continue. However, the converse of this could also be true that people took a liking for this particular shrimp. And this could definitely deter the population of shrimp owing to the demands. However, without any evidence to indicate why the fishermen are llikely to return, it is not possible to reason that the trend is expected to coninue. Further. the author discards the possibility of a great yield after the breeding season.
Finally, in the arguement, it is concluded that the Madagascan shrimp will quickly become an endangered species. However, there is little evidence on why the extinction is expected to happen at a rapid rate. The claim however seems to be based on the fact that with the increase in the fishing activities results in a decrease in the population. However, the author fails to provide any estimate on how soon this is expected to occur. It is possible that the decrease in the population, however significant it might be, donot indicate the levels that indicate endangereing of a species. Without both these individual numbers it is hard to conclude that the shrimp could become an endangered species.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-15 | Deepanshu Dewangan | 37 | view |
| 2019-09-13 | bharadwaj98 | 65 | view |
| 2019-09-13 | solankis304 | 23 | view |
| 2019-09-03 | aneela | 23 | view |
| 2019-08-27 | Lutfor Rahman Rony | 58 | view |
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers. 16
- Laws should be flexible enough to take account of various circumstances, times, and places. 16
- Recent incursions by deep-sea fishermen into the habitat of the Madagascan shrimp have led to a significant reduction in the species population. With the breeding season fast approaching, the number of shrimp should soon begin to increase. Nonetheless, th 54
- Only once one has known real sadness can one feel true happiness. 50
- The best leaders are those who encourage feedback from the people whom they lead. 74
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 600, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...ion that fishermen were solely to blame doesnt look cogent. Further the autor fai...
^^^^^^
Line 1, column 620, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ere solely to blame doesnt look cogent. Further the autor fails to elucidate on ...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 132, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...shed. In particular, the arguement also doesnt state if the population study has been ...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 305, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...mp population remained the same at this period of time in the previous years as well. It is al...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 549, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
... shrimp population throughout a certain period of time earlier to the recent study and without...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 723, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
... trend is expected to coninue. Further. the author discards the possibility of a gr...
^^^
Line 5, column 803, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... great yield after the breeding season. Finally, in the arguement, it is conclud...
^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'finally', 'however', 'if', 'look', 'may', 'so', 'well', 'in particular']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.209708737864 0.25644967241 82% => OK
Verbs: 0.163106796117 0.15541462614 105% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0815533980583 0.0836205057962 98% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0582524271845 0.0520304965353 112% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0271844660194 0.0272364105082 100% => OK
Prepositions: 0.135922330097 0.125424944231 108% => OK
Participles: 0.0368932038835 0.0416121511921 89% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.73204686825 2.79052419416 98% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0466019417476 0.026700313972 175% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.165048543689 0.113004496875 146% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0155339805825 0.0255425247493 61% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0116504854369 0.0127820249294 91% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2851.0 2731.13054187 104% => OK
No of words: 479.0 446.07635468 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.95198329854 6.12365571057 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67825486995 4.57801047555 102% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.375782881002 0.378187486979 99% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.292275574113 0.287650121315 102% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.23382045929 0.208842608468 112% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.125260960334 0.135150697306 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73204686825 2.79052419416 98% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 207.018472906 91% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.394572025052 0.469332199767 84% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 43.9726025198 52.1807786196 84% => OK
How many sentences: 25.0 20.039408867 125% => OK
Sentence length: 19.16 23.2022227129 83% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.7098378436 57.7814097925 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.04 141.986410481 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.16 23.2022227129 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.36 0.724660767414 50% => More Discourse Markers wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.14285714286 78% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 3.58251231527 195% => Correct essay format wanted or double check grammar & spelling issues after essay writing.
Readability: 48.3875574113 51.9672348444 93% => OK
Elegance: 1.5390625 1.8405768891 84% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.601466110604 0.441005458295 136% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.128470736865 0.135418324435 95% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.103919805813 0.0829849096947 125% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.568413754068 0.58762219726 97% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.186752869162 0.147661913831 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.271959427343 0.193483328276 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.15485887365 0.0970749176394 160% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.685612049986 0.42659136922 161% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0470583212076 0.0774707102158 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.495545898987 0.312017818177 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0608195129655 0.0698173142475 87% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.33743842365 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.87684729064 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.82512315271 207% => Less neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 7.0 6.46551724138 108% => OK
Negative topic words: 6.0 5.36822660099 112% => OK
Neutral topic words: 8.0 2.82389162562 283% => OK
Total topic words: 21.0 14.657635468 143% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.