The lecturer and author are both talking about the effect to the wildlife in the USA by the steady growth of the human population. The professor refutes that idea made in the reading passage. The three following reasons made in the lecture are supported the main idea as followed.
First, the professor mentions that urban area is becoming larger and larger however the research has shown that pigeons are seen at the city area. Even hawks and falcons are also founded. In the reading material, the author cast doubt on species are declining because of their habitat is taking by human. However, the truth by the speaker is that some animals are not able to live but also some birds are able.
Secondly, the lecturer states that the bigger human population would cause increasing of agriculture activities. From the research, the U.S.A use less lands for agriculture because they make variety of products. She tells that rural area is not needed to use for more so it would not effect to wildlife.
Thirdly, the speaker shows that example about pesticides. Nowadays, we invented pesticides contains less toxic so it would not hurt the environment and creatures in wildlife. Also, concerning in the reading material which is serious circulation caused by pesticides are getting solved.
In conclusion, the professor supports that the problem in wildlife of the United States related to the growth of human population are no longer huge issue in our life.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 193, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... that idea made in the reading passage. The three following reasons made in the lec...
^^^
Line 5, column 141, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: A
... activities. From the research, the U.S.A use less lands for agriculture because ...
^
Line 5, column 285, Rule ID: AFFECT_EFFECT[6]
Message: Did you mean 'affect'?
Suggestion: affect
... needed to use for more so it would not effect to wildlife. Thirdly, the speaker sh...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, in conclusion, talking about
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1223.0 1373.03311258 89% => OK
No of words: 243.0 270.72406181 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0329218107 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.94822203886 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50410085513 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 138.0 145.348785872 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.567901234568 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 387.0 419.366225166 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 33.2430750806 49.2860985944 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.3571428571 110.228320801 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.3571428571 21.698381199 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.92857142857 7.06452816374 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.222559892072 0.272083759551 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0626313889291 0.0996497079465 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0453547831589 0.0662205650399 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.10320603378 0.162205337803 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.059157428381 0.0443174109184 133% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 13.3589403974 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.2367328918 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.