According to the environmental magazine, the studies shows that a siginificent decline occured in the numbers of amphibians and in the diversity of the species between 1975 and 2002. The editor proposed a explanation that the amphibian eggs are eaten by the trout which were introuced into the park in 1975. However, this is just one possible explanation, and other explanation may be plausible as well.
First of all, between the decades, the weather in the park might have changed significently, which caused the declination of amphibians. If the temeperature is suitable for amphibians in 1975, but the temeperature rise up and cause the extinction of some species of amphibians. Or maybe, an earthquake happened between 1975 and 2002, and it changed the geology of the national park and cause the isolation of the habitat of amphibians. Then the scientists cannot find them easily, which caused the declination in the survey as well. Therefore, these could be one possible reason for the declination.
Secondly, besides the trout would eat the egg of amphibians, there may be other predators would hunt for amphibians. The possible predators could be introduced into the park without noticing by the scientists, and began their life in the park by hunting amphibians. As the time passing, the group of the predators grew up and invaded into the balance of amphibians. Finally, when the sceintists notice the declination is too late, most of the amphibians are eaten by the predators.
Furthermore, during the decades, there might be a disease prevailing in the group of amphibians. A pendamic kiilled most of the amphibians in short time, and the scientists did not notice this happened. And it’s too late when the survey conduct in 2002. More than half of the amphibians are dead because the disease.
To sum up, there are many possible explanations for the declination of amphibians and all of them seems plausible. The editor should not presume the explanation easily and ignore other possible explanations. As an editor of an environmental magazine, further survey should conduct to make the conclusion convincing.
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 345 350
No. of Characters: 1733 1500
No. of Different Words: 149 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.31 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.023 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.867 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 119 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 101 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 69 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 54 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.158 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.224 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.526 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.343 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.558 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.092 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 204, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
...ween 1975 and 2002. The editor proposed a explanation that the amphibian eggs are...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, well, in short, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 19.6327345309 66% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 11.1786427146 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 28.8173652695 35% => OK
Preposition: 48.0 55.5748502994 86% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1792.0 2260.96107784 79% => OK
No of words: 345.0 441.139720559 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19420289855 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.3097767484 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.98860680526 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 204.123752495 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.469565217391 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 548.1 705.55239521 78% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.67365269461 418% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.9361377988 57.8364921388 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 94.3157894737 119.503703932 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1578947368 23.324526521 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.31578947368 5.70786347227 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 6.88822355289 44% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 13.0 4.67664670659 278% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.193245363137 0.218282227539 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0606786518 0.0743258471296 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0675906331797 0.0701772020484 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115791070088 0.128457276422 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0676726035788 0.0628817314937 108% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 14.3799401198 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.64 8.32208582834 92% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 98.500998004 69% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.