Lucas deMey
12/6/17
Emerson
Bad academic paper
The paper i chose to analyze is titled “Impact Of Biodiversity Loss on Ocean Ecosystems”. The reason i chose this paper to analyze was that its is immensely complicated with high level words on a difficult subject and i wanted to see how well the author would explain this to someone with little to no background on the topic. The reason I think this is a bad writing is that it’s hard to understand at some points the sentences are just so jam packed with information it’s hard to determine what the author is getting at its almost like their just throwing information back into your face. Take this quote for example “These regional biodiversity losses impaired at least three critical ecosystem services (Fig. 2D): number of viable (non collapsed) fisheries (–33%); provision of nursery habitats such as oyster reefs, seagrass beds, and wetlands (–69%); and filtering and detoxification services provided by suspension feeders, submerged vegetation, and wetlands (–63%). Loss of filtering services probably contributed to declining water quality (18) and the increasing occurrence of harmful algal blooms, fish kills, shellfish and beach closures, and oxygen depletion (Fig. 2E). Increasing coastal flooding events (Fig. 2E) are linked to sea level rise but were probably accelerated by historical losses of floodplains and erosion control provided by coastal wetlands, reefs, and submerged vegetation (7).”. It’s almost as if there was no substance to that passage just straight information you have no idea what the author is getting to and what there point is making this almost useless writing.
Another reason i didn’t like this paper was that they didn’t simplify or explain anything to the average everyday person the acted like everyone on earth is marine biologist and would completely understand that passage with ease that’s why i think this academic writer stinks.
LINK : http://science.sciencemag.org/content/314/5800/787.full
