In the lecture, the speaker explains why the three advantages of salvage logging mentioned in the passage are not effective in the long-term.
To begin with, the passage claims that removing dead trees offers new ones adequate space to thrive. However, the professor refutes this and argues that cleaning the forest does not necessarily create a good environment for other trees to grow. On the other hand, decomposition of dead trees can make the soil more fertile, providing more nutrient for living plants.
Secondly, contrary to the idea in the reading that decaying trees harbors certain species of harmful insects, the lecturer points out that they also serves as a niche for other birds and insects that can benefit the forest in the long run. What is more, spruce bark beetle, for instance, have lived in the forest for around a century, and has been innocuous.
Finally, the instructor rules out the possibility of economic might. Making use of dead trees only brings about minimal and short-termed benefit, and it only temporarily creates jobs for local community. As asserted by the speaker, the cost for deploying professional equipment and offering training for local residents is also considerable. Hence, it is unreasonable to think that salvage logging could be beneficial to the economy.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 150, Rule ID: NON3PRS_VERB[2]
Message: The pronoun 'they' must be used with a non-third-person form of a verb: 'serve'
Suggestion: serve
... the lecturer points out that they also serves as a niche for other birds and insects ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, hence, however, second, secondly, so, for instance, to begin with, what is more, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 12.0772626932 50% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 22.412803532 45% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1102.0 1373.03311258 80% => OK
No of words: 212.0 270.72406181 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19811320755 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.81578560438 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6597583918 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 135.0 145.348785872 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.63679245283 0.540411800872 118% => OK
syllable_count: 338.4 419.366225166 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.116997792494 855% => Less interrogative sentences wanted.
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.2661530529 49.2860985944 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.2 110.228320801 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2 21.698381199 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.3 7.06452816374 160% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.368979701124 0.272083759551 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.129449051915 0.0996497079465 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0534369149401 0.0662205650399 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.19764263899 0.162205337803 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0657692236974 0.0443174109184 148% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.88 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.52 8.42419426049 113% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.