TPO-21 Genetically modified tree
The reading claims about genetic modification trees numerous benefits in order to plant on the large scale. The author elaborates his viewpoints by providing three main reasons. Nevertheless, the professor believes that it's obvious they have some benefits, but they even have some serious issues and refutes each of the author's reasons.
First, the reading avers that harder nature of these trees, and provide example of a new pest-resistant papaya trees to illustrate it's puting end to ringspot problem character. However, the professor refutes this concept by stating that these trees are individual and wouldn't survive in nature; hence, they are much uniform than natural plants. In addition, she mentioned climate change to shows that they all can die by only weather changing or another disaters.
Furthermore, the article posits that economic benefits of trees, and indicates that their faster grow up rate and much more production increase speed of returning farmers investment costs. On the other hands, the lectrure brings up the fact that farmers must pay more for modification trees approximately 3-4 more than natural ones. Also, she states that reporducing natural trees are free, but in a new generation trees farmers should pay to the company for every growing again since the law says.
Finally, the article asserts that modified trees can prevent overexploitation of wild trees since they could satisfiy wood demand for their fast growing rate. Contrary, the lectrure casts doubt on this claim by saying that faster grow rate has another negative consequence, and mentioned out compete situation for resourse competition. consequently, modified trees crowd out natural trees gradually and it not great for nature variety.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 269, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wouldn't
...ing that these trees are individual and wouldnt survive in nature; hence, they are much...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 164, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'farmers'' or 'farmer's'?
Suggestion: farmers'; farmer's
... production increase speed of returning farmers investment costs. On the other hands, t...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 337, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Consequently
...ete situation for resourse competition. consequently, modified trees crowd out natural trees...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, finally, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, nevertheless, so, in addition, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 10.4613686534 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1473.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 272.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.41544117647 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65007997529 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.610294117647 0.540411800872 113% => OK
syllable_count: 445.5 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 5.0 1.51434878587 330% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.4032327463 49.2860985944 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.75 110.228320801 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6666666667 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.1666666667 7.06452816374 144% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.392716392887 0.272083759551 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.13462052093 0.0996497079465 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0874679233231 0.0662205650399 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.211801301776 0.162205337803 131% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0711307039095 0.0443174109184 161% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.3589403974 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 12.2367328918 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.26 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 63.6247240618 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => 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.