Trying to save endangered species from extinction is waste of valuable resources.
Do you agree or disagree?
Over the past few decades, endangered animals protection has never failed to draw public attention in many countries around the world. Some people believe that these species are worst to protecting because of wasting resources; I completely disagree with this point of view.
Firstly, it is indispensable that animals play an important role on maintaining balance of nature. Ecosystems are delicate arrangements where plants and animals all depend on each other for survival. The disappearance or introduction of any species have brought with it such problems and negative impacts upon others like breaking food chain and alternating natural habitat where they live in. These changes would disrupt the balance of nature, which frequently return to haunt us in unexpected way. For example, the rabbits introduced in Australia soon after the European settlement now compete with native species for food and destroy a vast amount of farmer’s crops, or the extinction of predator could lead to serious plagues by incredibly growth in population of their prey.
Besides, it is absurd to argue that preserving endangered animals is waste of valuable resources. In fact, protecting animal’s natural habitats ensures their survival, and almost scientists agree that these habitats are also crucial for human life. Rainforests, for example, produce oxygen, absorb carbon dioxide and stabilize Earth’s climate. If we destroyed these areas, the costs of managing the resulting changes would far outweigh the costs of conservation. Therefore, by saving animals habitats can human maintain the natural balance of all life on Earth.
In conclusion, apart from aforementioned reasons above, I reaffirm that protecting endangered species is necessary and we should try our best to do this.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 39, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'animals'' or 'animal's'?
Suggestion: animals'; animal's
Over the past few decades, endangered animals protection has never failed to draw pub...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, first, firstly, if, so, therefore, apart from, for example, in conclusion, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 13.1623246493 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1527.0 1615.20841683 95% => OK
No of words: 273.0 315.596192385 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.59340659341 5.12529762239 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06481385082 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.89863272541 2.80592935109 103% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 176.041082164 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.673992673993 0.561755894193 120% => OK
syllable_count: 474.3 506.74238477 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.2708321061 49.4020404114 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.461538462 106.682146367 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0 20.7667163134 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.46153846154 7.06120827912 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.191993968987 0.244688304435 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.060049641184 0.084324248473 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0780731543241 0.0667982634062 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119838918813 0.151304729494 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0569028119093 0.056905535591 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.0946893788 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.14 12.4159519038 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.71 8.58950901804 113% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 78.4519038076 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 9.78957915832 117% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.7795591182 93% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 Out of 9
---------------------
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.