The reading claims that agnostids as the primitive arthropods-relatives of modern insects behaved and lived in three main ways. However, the lecturer finds all the ideas dubious and presents some evidence to refute them all.
First of all, the author argues that the agnostids were swift predators that might have hunted smaller see animals because of their similarity with other types of primitive arthropods. Conversely, the lecturer brings up the idea that primitive arthropods possessed large well-developed eyes which are vital for hunting their prey. On the other hand, the fossil remains of agnostids indicate that they had very tiny and poorly developed eyes. Researchers speculated that they might have been blind. Thus, they had to chase after their prey using other special organs to help them. However, their fossils lack that sort of organs.
Furthermore, the reading passage holds the view that agnostids may have lived in the seafloor. On the contrary, the professor underlines the fact that animals which live in seafloor are not capable of moving so fast across the sea. As a result, they often do not spread over the sea. However, agnostid fossils have been found in many multiple areas which means they probably might have been able to move quickly across the large areas of the sea. This ability is incompatible with the characteristic of animals which are inhabiting the seafloor.
Finally, the reading asserts that agnostids were parasites just like modern-day arthropods. In contrast, the speaker dismisses this issue due to the fact that the population of parasites species is not very large since they can kill the host organisms and this cycle will harm themselves as well. However, the large population of agnostids demonstrated in the number of fossils contradicts with this fact.
- TPO24 83
- TPO25 – Independent: A/D? Young people nowadays do not give enough time to help their communities. 76
- Do you agree or disagree with following statement? It is better to have broad knowledge of many academic subjects to specialize in one specific subject. 76
- Do you agree or disagree with following statement? It is better to have broad knowledge of many academic subjects to specialize in one specific subject. 43
- TPO11. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Some people say that the Internet provides people with a lot of valuable information. Others think access to so much information creates problems. Which view do you agree with? 80
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, so, thus, well, in contrast, sort of, as a result, first of all, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1529.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 291.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25429553265 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.13022058845 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67071998606 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 145.348785872 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.560137457045 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 462.6 419.366225166 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => 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: 44.2307514632 49.2860985944 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.5625 110.228320801 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1875 21.698381199 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.875 7.06452816374 140% => 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 : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.429668312392 0.272083759551 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.130952300817 0.0996497079465 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0882302406162 0.0662205650399 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.230956075379 0.162205337803 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0535588735186 0.0443174109184 121% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.33 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.