TPO 26 integrated essay on zebra mussel..please rate it..

[Rakeshchanda]

The reading and lecture discusses the same topic but present it from different perspectives. The reading states that Zebra mussel, a fresh water shell fish spread cannot be controlled and it poses a serious threat to fresh water fish populations in all of North america. The professor gives strong argument in the favour of opposite and refutes each of the author’s reasons.The lecturer says that It is not so clear that it is a threat to fish population. Although spread of mussels to north america is controlled it has not been done in previous cases due to lack of knowledge.
To begin with, Reading states that zebra mussel spread by human population occurs by attaching to bottom of ship and also in ballast water which the ships uses to balance. In contrast, the professor counters this point by asserting that Spread by ships can be controlled by emptying the ballast water in ships as soon as ships reaches North america. Fresh water is replaced by ocean water and mussels cannot tolerate this salinity and there by their death prevails.
Second, reading pushes forth idea that zebra mussels dominate in the habitat where there is no natural predators. The lecturer counters this point. He posits that local aquatic birds starts switching their food from their regular food to zebra mussel once the mussel becomes dominant in the habitat. Thus mussel will not spread if birds start feeding on them.
Last but not least, mussels feed on fish populations thereby causing threat to local fish population. This argument is rebutted in lecture by saying that mussel have positive impact on fish population living at bottom of sea.Once mussel dies it releases nutrients that are eaten by fish population living at bottom and their population grow up fast.

TOEFL listening lectures: A lecture from a social studies class

[Luschen]

Hi, here is a link to the reading and the lecture: english-test.net/forum/ftopic134739.html

I think you did a pretty good job, but you misheard a few secondary points of the lecture and it would have been nice to mention plankton in your last paragraph. Your overall format is good, though your introduction could be a bit more clear. The point is that the reading says this spread is a big risk, but the lecture counters by saying that this spread can be controlled and will not have a negative effect on the environment. Overall, I would rate this a 3.5 out of 5.

@Rakeshchanda

The reading and lecture discu[ss] the same topic but present it from different perspectives. The reading states that Zebra mussel, a fresh water shell fish spread {better to say “… that the spread of the Zebra mussel, a freshwater shellfish, cannot be …”} cannot be controlled and it poses a serious threat to fresh water fish populations in all of North [ A]merica. The professor gives strong argument in the favour of [the] opposite and refutes each of the author’s reasons. The lecturer says that It is not so clear that it is a threat to fish population. Although [the] spread of mussels to [ N]orth [ A]merica is controlled it has not been done in previous cases due to lack of knowledge. {this is unclear to me - what previous cases?}
To begin with,[ the r]eading states that zebra mussel spread[ing] by human population occurs by attaching to [the] bottom of ship[s ] and also in ballast water which the ships uses to balance. In contrast, the professor counters this point by asserting that [the] Spread by ships can be controlled by emptying the ballast water in ships as soon as ships reaches North [ A]merica. {I didn’t hear this part - I think you got confused by “switch to salt water” The lecturer means to use salt water the whole time. They will switch now and then continue to use salt water from now on} Fresh water is replaced by ocean water and mussels cannot tolerate this salinity and there by their death prevails. {“their death prevails” sounds pretty odd}
Second, [the] reading pushes forth [the] idea that zebra mussels dominate in the habitat where there is no natural predators. The lecturer counters this point. He posits that local aquatic birds star[t ] switching their food{“diet” would be better here to avoid repetition} from their regular food to zebra mussel[s ] once the mussel becomes dominant in the habitat. Thus [the] mussel will not spread if birds start feeding on them.
Last but not least, mussels feed on fish populations[,] thereby causing [a ]threat to local fish population. This argument is rebutted in [the] lecture by saying {“which says” is better than “by saying” here} that mussel have positive impact on [the] fish population living at bottom of [lakes]sea.Once mussel dies it releases nutrients that are eaten by fish population living at bottom and their population grow up fast {“grows rapidly” is better}. {it would be nice to mention “plankton” in this paragraph, as that is what the reading and the lecture both focus on here}

TOEFL listening lectures: A lecture from a social studies class