Author: chris

General instructions
Your critique must fit on two 8 ½ x 11” pages, double-spaced (12 pt font), with at least ½ inch margins to give readers space to write their comments. Points will be deducted for papers that exceed this length. Given this space limitation, it is important to be succinct, but write in complete sentences. Don’t waste words. Write a first draft, and then carefully edit out unnecessary material in subsequent drafts. Be sure to type the full citation of the paper (in Ecology format) at the top of the first page, along with your name.

You can organize your critique around the IMRAD format, evaluating each section in turn. Be sure to consider the following questions as you review the paper:
1. What is the specific purpose/goal of this study?
2. Do the authors clearly state their hypotheses? What are they?
3. What general ecological or environmental issue is the study addressing? Do the authors make this connection in their Introduction or Discussion?
4. Are you satisfied with the authors’ study design? Is it described in sufficient detail that you could repeat the study? Are all the elements of a rigorous experimental study included?
5. Are the data/results clearly presented?
6. Do the data and statistical analyses support the authors’ conclusions? Are there alternative explanations for some of the patterns they document?
7. If you found fault with the study’s design, how specifically could it be improved?
8. Given its faults, what valid conclusions can be drawn from the data?
One final point: you may find numerous faults with a paper, but some are more damning than others. Given the limited space we have allotted you, focus on the most critical problems, the ones that pose the greatest challenge to the author’s thesis. If you have room, you can simply add a list of the minor ones

General instructions
Your critique must fit on two 8 ½ x 11” pages, double-spaced (12 pt font), with at least ½ inch margins to give readers space to write their comments. Points will be deducted for papers that exceed this length. Given this space limitation, it is important to be succinct, but write in complete sentences. Don’t waste words. Write a first draft, and then carefully edit out unnecessary material in subsequent drafts. Be sure to type the full citation of the paper (in Ecology format) at the top of the first page, along with your name.

You can organize your critique around the IMRAD format, evaluating each section in turn. Be sure to consider the following questions as you review the paper:
1. What is the specific purpose/goal of this study?
2. Do the authors clearly state their hypotheses? What are they?
3. What general ecological or environmental issue is the study addressing? Do the authors make this connection in their Introduction or Discussion?
4. Are you satisfied with the authors’ study design? Is it described in sufficient detail that you could repeat the study? Are all the elements of a rigorous experimental study included?
5. Are the data/results clearly presented?
6. Do the data and statistical analyses support the authors’ conclusions? Are there alternative explanations for some of the patterns they document?
7. If you found fault with the study’s design, how specifically could it be improved?
8. Given its faults, what valid conclusions can be drawn from the data?
One final point: you may find numerous faults with a paper, but some are more damning than others. Given the limited space we have allotted you, focus on the most critical problems, the ones that pose the greatest challenge to the author’s thesis. If you have room, you can simply add a list of the minor ones

General instructions
Your critique must fit on two 8 ½ x 11” pages, double-spaced (12 pt font), with at least ½ inch margins to give readers space to write their comments. Points will be deducted for papers that exceed this length. Given this space limitation, it is important to be succinct, but write in complete sentences. Don’t waste words. Write a first draft, and then carefully edit out unnecessary material in subsequent drafts. Be sure to type the full citation of the paper (in Ecology format) at the top of the first page, along with your name.

You can organize your critique around the IMRAD format, evaluating each section in turn. Be sure to consider the following questions as you review the paper:
1. What is the specific purpose/goal of this study?
2. Do the authors clearly state their hypotheses? What are they?
3. What general ecological or environmental issue is the study addressing? Do the authors make this connection in their Introduction or Discussion?
4. Are you satisfied with the authors’ study design? Is it described in sufficient detail that you could repeat the study? Are all the elements of a rigorous experimental study included?
5. Are the data/results clearly presented?
6. Do the data and statistical analyses support the authors’ conclusions? Are there alternative explanations for some of the patterns they document?
7. If you found fault with the study’s design, how specifically could it be improved?
8. Given its faults, what valid conclusions can be drawn from the data?
One final point: you may find numerous faults with a paper, but some are more damning than others. Given the limited space we have allotted you, focus on the most critical problems, the ones that pose the greatest challenge to the author’s thesis. If you have room, you can simply add a list of the minor ones

General instructions
Your critique must fit on two 8 ½ x 11” pages, double-spaced (12 pt font), with at least ½ inch margins to give readers space to write their comments. Points will be deducted for papers that exceed this length. Given this space limitation, it is important to be succinct, but write in complete sentences. Don’t waste words. Write a first draft, and then carefully edit out unnecessary material in subsequent drafts. Be sure to type the full citation of the paper (in Ecology format) at the top of the first page, along with your name.

You can organize your critique around the IMRAD format, evaluating each section in turn. Be sure to consider the following questions as you review the paper:
1. What is the specific purpose/goal of this study?
2. Do the authors clearly state their hypotheses? What are they?
3. What general ecological or environmental issue is the study addressing? Do the authors make this connection in their Introduction or Discussion?
4. Are you satisfied with the authors’ study design? Is it described in sufficient detail that you could repeat the study? Are all the elements of a rigorous experimental study included?
5. Are the data/results clearly presented?
6. Do the data and statistical analyses support the authors’ conclusions? Are there alternative explanations for some of the patterns they document?
7. If you found fault with the study’s design, how specifically could it be improved?
8. Given its faults, what valid conclusions can be drawn from the data?
One final point: you may find numerous faults with a paper, but some are more damning than others. Given the limited space we have allotted you, focus on the most critical problems, the ones that pose the greatest challenge to the author’s thesis. If you have room, you can simply add a list of the minor ones

General instructions
Your critique must fit on two 8 ½ x 11” pages, double-spaced (12 pt font), with at least ½ inch margins to give readers space to write their comments. Points will be deducted for papers that exceed this length. Given this space limitation, it is important to be succinct, but write in complete sentences. Don’t waste words. Write a first draft, and then carefully edit out unnecessary material in subsequent drafts. Be sure to type the full citation of the paper (in Ecology format) at the top of the first page, along with your name.

You can organize your critique around the IMRAD format, evaluating each section in turn. Be sure to consider the following questions as you review the paper:
1. What is the specific purpose/goal of this study?
2. Do the authors clearly state their hypotheses? What are they?
3. What general ecological or environmental issue is the study addressing? Do the authors make this connection in their Introduction or Discussion?
4. Are you satisfied with the authors’ study design? Is it described in sufficient detail that you could repeat the study? Are all the elements of a rigorous experimental study included?
5. Are the data/results clearly presented?
6. Do the data and statistical analyses support the authors’ conclusions? Are there alternative explanations for some of the patterns they document?
7. If you found fault with the study’s design, how specifically could it be improved?
8. Given its faults, what valid conclusions can be drawn from the data?
One final point: you may find numerous faults with a paper, but some are more damning than others. Given the limited space we have allotted you, focus on the most critical problems, the ones that pose the greatest challenge to the author’s thesis. If you have room, you can simply add a list of the minor ones

General instructions
Your critique must fit on two 8 ½ x 11” pages, double-spaced (12 pt font), with at least ½ inch margins to give readers space to write their comments. Points will be deducted for papers that exceed this length. Given this space limitation, it is important to be succinct, but write in complete sentences. Don’t waste words. Write a first draft, and then carefully edit out unnecessary material in subsequent drafts. Be sure to type the full citation of the paper (in Ecology format) at the top of the first page, along with your name.

You can organize your critique around the IMRAD format, evaluating each section in turn. Be sure to consider the following questions as you review the paper:
1. What is the specific purpose/goal of this study?
2. Do the authors clearly state their hypotheses? What are they?
3. What general ecological or environmental issue is the study addressing? Do the authors make this connection in their Introduction or Discussion?
4. Are you satisfied with the authors’ study design? Is it described in sufficient detail that you could repeat the study? Are all the elements of a rigorous experimental study included?
5. Are the data/results clearly presented?
6. Do the data and statistical analyses support the authors’ conclusions? Are there alternative explanations for some of the patterns they document?
7. If you found fault with the study’s design, how specifically could it be improved?
8. Given its faults, what valid conclusions can be drawn from the data?
One final point: you may find numerous faults with a paper, but some are more damning than others. Given the limited space we have allotted you, focus on the most critical problems, the ones that pose the greatest challenge to the author’s thesis. If you have room, you can simply add a list of the minor ones

General instructions
Your critique must fit on two 8 ½ x 11” pages, double-spaced (12 pt font), with at least ½ inch margins to give readers space to write their comments. Points will be deducted for papers that exceed this length. Given this space limitation, it is important to be succinct, but write in complete sentences. Don’t waste words. Write a first draft, and then carefully edit out unnecessary material in subsequent drafts. Be sure to type the full citation of the paper (in Ecology format) at the top of the first page, along with your name.

You can organize your critique around the IMRAD format, evaluating each section in turn. Be sure to consider the following questions as you review the paper:
1. What is the specific purpose/goal of this study?
2. Do the authors clearly state their hypotheses? What are they?
3. What general ecological or environmental issue is the study addressing? Do the authors make this connection in their Introduction or Discussion?
4. Are you satisfied with the authors’ study design? Is it described in sufficient detail that you could repeat the study? Are all the elements of a rigorous experimental study included?
5. Are the data/results clearly presented?
6. Do the data and statistical analyses support the authors’ conclusions? Are there alternative explanations for some of the patterns they document?
7. If you found fault with the study’s design, how specifically could it be improved?
8. Given its faults, what valid conclusions can be drawn from the data?
One final point: you may find numerous faults with a paper, but some are more damning than others. Given the limited space we have allotted you, focus on the most critical problems, the ones that pose the greatest challenge to the author’s thesis. If you have room, you can simply add a list of the minor ones

General instructions
Your critique must fit on two 8 ½ x 11” pages, double-spaced (12 pt font), with at least ½ inch margins to give readers space to write their comments. Points will be deducted for papers that exceed this length. Given this space limitation, it is important to be succinct, but write in complete sentences. Don’t waste words. Write a first draft, and then carefully edit out unnecessary material in subsequent drafts. Be sure to type the full citation of the paper (in Ecology format) at the top of the first page, along with your name.

You can organize your critique around the IMRAD format, evaluating each section in turn. Be sure to consider the following questions as you review the paper:
1. What is the specific purpose/goal of this study?
2. Do the authors clearly state their hypotheses? What are they?
3. What general ecological or environmental issue is the study addressing? Do the authors make this connection in their Introduction or Discussion?
4. Are you satisfied with the authors’ study design? Is it described in sufficient detail that you could repeat the study? Are all the elements of a rigorous experimental study included?
5. Are the data/results clearly presented?
6. Do the data and statistical analyses support the authors’ conclusions? Are there alternative explanations for some of the patterns they document?
7. If you found fault with the study’s design, how specifically could it be improved?
8. Given its faults, what valid conclusions can be drawn from the data?
One final point: you may find numerous faults with a paper, but some are more damning than others. Given the limited space we have allotted you, focus on the most critical problems, the ones that pose the greatest challenge to the author’s thesis. If you have room, you can simply add a list of the minor ones

This is a continuation of 81560395.

The aim of the research is to find out if consumers would be interested in shopping online for luxury brands and why luxury brands are still reluctant towards e-commerce ?

– this should be based on the literature review done on the same subject by writer number: 57590.

-we are going to conduct a survey

Write a 750- to 1,050-word paper that addresses the following points about your 3-day food intake:

Recorded intake of protein, carbohydrates, and lipids
Which foods in your recorded daily intake provide protein? Which provide carbohydrates? Which provide lipids?
Review how your recorded protein, carbohydrate, and lipid intake compares with the recommendations of the dietary reference intake. If your recorded protein-carbohydrate-fat intake was too high or too low, which foods might you add or remove to achieve your goal and keep other nutrients in balance?
Is the protein in each food you ate complete or incomplete, combining to become complementary? Why is this important?
How much of your daily recommended protein, carbohydrates, and lipid intake did you achieve? If your macronutrient intake is insufficient or excessive, what might you do to bring it into the recommended range? Provide specific recommendations.
Macronutrient intake ranges
Is macronutrient intake within the recommended range important? What are the effects of too much or too little of a macronutrient? What happens if you consistently eat too little protein? What happens if you eat too few carbohydrates? What happens if you eat too few lipids?
Fiber intake ranges
Does your fiber total meet 100% of the recommendation for you, as calculated at iProfile?
Does your diet meet the minimum number of servings of foods from each fiber-containing group? If not, which of the fiber-containing groups–fruits and vegetables–fell short of the recommended intake?
Which specific foods provide the most fiber in your meals? Which provide the least? Identify trends in your food choices that might affect your fiber intakes.
Dietary modifications
What changes might you make to increase the fiber in your diet?
How might insufficient or excessive amounts of proteins, carbohydrates, fats, or fiber contribute to health or illness? Provide examples.
What have you learned about your diet?

Cite three references other than the course text.