The line graph below shows the land used for organic crops in two countries between 1985 and 2010. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
Presented is the line graph illustrating the land use data for nonchemical food in two given countries A and B in the period from 1985 and 2010
Overall, it is transparent from the chart that country A had spent quite much space to develop pure products. It is also noticeable that while investment of two countries is not expanded at the beginning and then it witnessed a sharp growth land for planting and nourishing.
To begin with, the quantity of land for organic food was a same total at around 25 thousand hectares in 1985. After that, we cannot see a different change in the next period 1985-1990 that nation A was investing more their space for organic field than state B with over 50000 hectares and under 49000 hectares (1990), respectively. Five next years, although they till remarkable improved, both nations A and B still had resemblance position as 1990.
On the other hand, nation B passed through state A since 1996 accounted for the lion ‘share at near 300000 hectares (2000), almost two times higher than the figures for nation A with near 200000 hectares in same year. From 2000 to 2005, land exploitation in state B peaked at near 300000 hectares regardless of slightly downward; likewise, country A trend also like that with near 190000 hectares (2005). The figures for both two A,B states were anticipated to go down , with a noticeable decrease dedicate to the letter from near 290000 hectares to near 140000 hectares, Whereas the former is likely to fall from near 190000 hectares to 150000 hectares.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 427, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , B
...ectares 2005. The figures for both two A,B states were anticipated to go down , wi...
^^
Line 4, column 464, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...o A,B states were anticipated to go down , with a noticeable decrease dedicate to...
^^
Line 4, column 493, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... to go down , with a noticeable decrease dedicate to the letter from near 290000 ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, if, likewise, so, still, then, whereas, while, to begin with, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 7.0 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 11.0 5.60731707317 196% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 48.0 33.7804878049 142% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 3.97073170732 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1265.0 965.302439024 131% => OK
No of words: 262.0 196.424390244 133% => OK
Chars per words: 4.82824427481 4.92477711251 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02323427807 3.73543355544 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56119708635 2.65546596893 96% => OK
Unique words: 152.0 106.607317073 143% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.580152671756 0.547539520022 106% => OK
syllable_count: 352.8 283.868780488 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 32.0 22.4926829268 142% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 52.2775047224 43.030603864 121% => OK
Chars per sentence: 158.125 112.824112599 140% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.75 22.9334400587 143% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.625 5.23603664747 203% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.151256476514 0.215688989381 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0777487553469 0.103423049105 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0636205065708 0.0843802449381 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.132359910312 0.15604864568 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.092970130672 0.0819641961636 113% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.7 13.2329268293 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 64.38 61.2550243902 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.2 10.3012195122 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.33 11.4140731707 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.18 8.06136585366 101% => OK
difficult_words: 49.0 40.7170731707 120% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 10.9970731707 135% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.