Category: Animal science

Hello, I was hoping to have my paper rewritten to a proper  mla scienfic research paper including in-text citations. 

The references need to be apa7 style
The Rubric:
Criteria Ratings Pts
Composition (10%)
0 pts
1.Excellent
Very well written. No grammatical or spelling errors. Material was organized in a logical manner; the composition was presented clearly and concisely to a very high standard.
0 pts
2.Good
Quite well written. No grammatical or spelling errors. Material was organized in a logical manner; the writing style conveyed the main points to the reader but could be improved for clarity and flow; writing was to a good standard.
0 pts
3.Reasonable
Reasonably well written. Material was generally organized in a logical manner but at times was disjointed; the writing style conveyed the main points to the reader but could be improved for clarity and flow; writing was to a reasonable standard.
0 pts
4.Needs improvement
Writing needs improvement. Some grammatical and spelling errors. Material conveyed the main points required but needed to be organized in a more logical manner; the writing style was disjointed and fragmented; writing needs improvement.
0 pts
5.Poor
Poorly written. Extensive grammatical and spelling errors. Material was not organized in a logical manner and conveyed very little of the required information. The writing style was disjointed and fragmented; writing needs significant improvement.
/ 0 pts
Introduction (20%)
0 pts
1.Excellent
Introduces the topic and the environmental factor under review. Provides a strong background supported by appropriate scientific literature. Effectively “sets the scene” for the rest of the paper.
0 pts
2.Good
Introduces the topic and the environmental factor under review, providing an adequate background supported by appropriate scientific literature.
0 pts
3.Reasonable
Introduces the topic and the environmental factor under review, providing some background supported by appropriate scientific literature.
0 pts
4.Needs improvement
The introduction to the topic and the environmental factor under consideration is limited and/or background is limited, and limited use of appropriate scientific literature.
0 pts
5.Poor
The topic and the environmental factor under consideration are not introduced. Very limited background and use of supporting scientific literature.
/ 0 pts
Review of the importance of the chosen environmental factor on animal behaviour (60%)
0 pts
1.Excellent
Provides in depth, logical discussion of the importance of the chosen environmental factor on animal behaviour. Arguments presented are pertinent to the topic, with no key arguments missing and supported by appropriate scientific literature. Discussion uses a comparative style, comparing and contrasting relevant studies to provide in-depth consideration of the effects of the environmental factor on animal behaviour.
0 pts
2.Good
Provides a detailed, logical discussion of the importance of the chosen environmental factor on animal behaviour. Arguments presented are pertinent to the topic, most key arguments addressed and supported by appropriate scientific literature. Discussion uses a comparative style, comparing and contrasting relevant studies to provide detailed consideration of the effects of the environmental factor on animal behaviour.
0 pts
3.Reasonable
Provides a logical discussion of the importance of the chosen environmental factor on animal behaviour. Arguments presented are relevant to the topic, however some key arguments are missing. Supported by some scientific literature. Some comparison of relevant studies to provide consideration of the effects of the environmental factor on animal behaviour.
0 pts
4.Needs improvement
Limited discussion of the importance of the chosen environmental factor on animal behaviour. Arguments presented are not always relevant to the topic, and key arguments are missing. Limited scientific literature used to support discussion. Limited comparison of relevant studies to provide consideration of the effects of the environmental factor on animal behaviour.
0 pts
5.Poor
Very limited discussion of the importance of the chosen environmental factor on animal behaviour. Arguments presented are not relevant to the topic, and key arguments are missing. Limited or no use of scientific literature to support discussion. Very limited/no comparison of relevant studies to provide consideration of the effects of the environmental factor on animal behaviour.
/ 0 pts
References (10%)
0 pts
1.Excellent
References are relevant and presented correctly.
0 pts
2.Good
References are relevant and presented correctly.
0 pts
3.Reasonable
References are presented correctly, but the range of literature is limited
0 pts
4.Needs improvement
Irrelevant references and/or some issues with style. Range of literature considered is very limited.
0 pts
5.Poor
Irrelevant references and issues with style. Relevant literature not considered.
/ 0 pts
Total Points: 0

What you’re doing
For this assignment, you will be completing a survey, and then conducting a basic analysis and interpretation based on your results. If you have not already completed the survey, please do so now before reading further. The survey is here.
Instructions
Now that you have completed the survey, follow the directions below:
The survey you took is the first section of a larger survey that was commissioned by the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies (WAFWA) in 2004,  in order to establish the factors that influence the presence of a defined set of wildlife value orientations in the western United States.  This study is available online as Teel et al (2005).
The purpose of this assignment is to:
Have you assess your wildlife value orientation and belief dimensions using the Teel et al (2005) instrument, and
Gain some insight into the use of survey instruments to characterize values and beliefs, and
Identify ways in which knowledge of values and beliefs could benefit the natural resource manager.
Procedure
Once you have completed the survey, use the following directions to summarize your responses.  
1)  Average your indicated numerical value for your responses (e.g., 1=strongly disagree and 7=strongly agree) for the following groups of questions:
1a. #1, 4, 9, 10, 12, and 13.  This value is your utilitarian belief dimension score.
1b. #2, 5, 6, and 7.  This value is your mutualism belief dimension score.
1c. #18, 22, 24, 25, and 28.  This value is your caring belief dimension score.
1d. #11, 14, 16, and 19.  This value is your safety belief dimension score.
1e. #26, 29, and 31.  This value is your environmental belief dimension score.
2) Reverse the scores for questions #15, 17, 20, and 27.  For example if your score was 5, it becomes a 3, a 7 becomes a 1, and a 6 becomes a 2.  Once you have reversed the scores for these 4 questions, average the values for the following groups:
2a. #17 and 20.  This value is your attraction belief dimension score.
2b. #3, 15, 23, and 27.  This value is your hunting belief dimension score.
3) Average your mutualism belief score (1b above) and your caring belief score (1c), this is your Mutualism value orientation score.
4) Average your utilitarian belief score (1a) and your hunting belief dimension score (2b), this is your Utilitarian value orientation score. 
5) Utilize the following table to establish your value orientation type (in bold):
Utilitarian Value Orientation Score
4.5
Mutualism Value
Orientation Score
4.5
Mutualist
Pluralist
6) Sum the rankings for the 1st and 3rd statements in each of the 3 groups on the first page of the survey (so you are summing 6 values).  This is your materialist ranking.
7) Sum the rankings for the 2nd and 4th statements in each of the 3 groups (again, 6 values total).  This is your post-materialist ranking.
8) Subtract your post-materialist ranking (#7) from your materialist ranking (#6), this is your Materialist/Post-Materialist Index.  If it is positive, you have a post-materialist value set, if it is negative, a materialist value set.  If it is 0, you have a mixed values set.
Questions
Provide the results of your analysis of the survey you took. These results should indicate the values that are used to determine the following:
Your dominant belief dimension (out of the utilitarian, hunting, mutualist, and caring dimensions), 
Your utilitarian and mutualism orientation scores (whichever is highest is your value orientation),
Your value orientation type (Distanced, Utilitarian, Mutualist, Pluralist),
Your Attraction, Safety, and Environmentalism belief dimension scores,
Your Materialist/post-materialist score
Reflect on your categorization – with a focus on your wildlife value orientation type (Distanced, Utilitarian, Mutualist, Pluralist). How might knowledge of your own orientation influence your interactions with others who possess a different value orientation? What predispositions does your orientation have that might conflict with those of other value orientations? Inform your statements with support from the Petitpas and Bonacic (2019) paper on the Guanaco as well as the described results of the use of this survey found in Manfredo et al (2009)
Literature Cited
Manfredo, M.J., T.L. Teel, and K.L. Henry.   2009.  Linking society and environment: a multi-level model of shifting wildlife value orientations in the western U.S.  Social Science Quarterly 90:407-427.
Petitpas, R., and C. Bonacic. 2019. Ontological Politics of Wildlife: Local People, Conservation Biologists and Guanacos. Conservation & Society 17(3): 250–257. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26677961.
Teel, T. L., A.A. Dayer, M.J. Manfredo, and A.D. Bright.  2005.  Regional results from the research project entitled “Wildlife Values in the West.” (Project Rep. No. 58). Project Report for the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University, Human Dimensions in Natural Resources Unit.  Available at ResearchGate

Introduction
At the outset of the Structured Decision Making process, the interested parties must come together to brainstorm appropriate fundamental objectives. This brainstorm informs what each group wants the objectives to be, which is where the various interested parties start to diverge as they prioritize elements of the scenario differently. 
Initial Post
Propose a minimum of 3 fundamental objectives for this project. In presenting each objective, address the primary interested party that would most value this objective, and define why the objective is a fundamental objective rather than other possible types of objectives. Be sure to directly reference elements of the scenario that have informed your position and objectives. Where appropriate, incorporate relevant data that supports your claims and objectives.
Mark as done
Responses
Select three posts representing positions of interested parties that are different from your own and comment on their proposed objectives. Would other interested parties in the scenario likely disagree with the objective or is the objective likely a consensus objective. Would other interested parties highly rank this objective or just find it acceptable if their primary objective was also included? 

The evolution of dogs. Touch on the lifestyles of dogs now (globally most dogs are street dogs). Add in why dogs have been so altered by the transition from independence to joining Team Human, but cats are still basically the same critters they used to be. Use knowledge of natural selection natural history, and biological anthropology. Needs citations.