The pie chart below shows the main reasons why agricultural land becomes less productive .The table shows how these causes affected three regions of the world during the 1990s.
The pie chart indicates the main reasons of land degradation around the world, while the table gives the percentage of land degraded by these reasons in North America, Europe, and Ocenia.
Overall, it can be seen that overgazing is carried highest percentage for causing worldwide land degradation. From the it is evident that total land degradation is highest in Europe, whereas it is lowest in North America.
Looking at the pie chart in more detail, it is clear that land degradation due to over-gazing is 35 % in worldwide, which is the highest proportion in the pie chart. In contrast, worldwide land degradation is seen lowest for other reasons, at 7 %. Furthermore, land degradation by deforestation and over-cultivation are almost same, 30 % and 28 % respectively.
Turning to the table data set, it is apparent that 23% of total land is degraded in Europe, as opposed to 5 % in North America. Deforestation is the primary cause of degradation in Europe, as it occupies 9.8 %. However, only 0.2 % of total land is degraded by this factor in North America. Over-cultivation is accounted at 3.3 %, which is less than a half of Europe’s percentage. Finally, land is degraded by deforestation and over-gazing are 1.7 % and 11.3 % accordingly in occeania. Noticeably, Over-cultivation is not responsible for land degradation.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 44, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'carried the highest'.
Suggestion: carried the highest
...rall, it can be seen that overgazing is carried highest percentage for causing worldwide land d...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 116, Rule ID: DT_PRP[1]
Message: Possible typo. Did you mean 'the' or 'it'?
Suggestion: the; it
...ausing worldwide land degradation. From the it is evident that total land degradation ...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 556, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s not responsible for land degradation.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, finally, furthermore, however, look, so, whereas, while, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 7.0 271% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 12.0 5.60731707317 214% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 35.0 33.7804878049 104% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 3.97073170732 378% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1119.0 965.302439024 116% => OK
No of words: 213.0 196.424390244 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25352112676 4.92477711251 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82027741392 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.34794734618 2.65546596893 126% => OK
Unique words: 106.0 106.607317073 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.49765258216 0.547539520022 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 345.6 283.868780488 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.33902439024 23% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 8.94146341463 134% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.4926829268 76% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.1255850581 43.030603864 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.25 112.824112599 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.75 22.9334400587 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.75 5.23603664747 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 3.70975609756 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 1.13902439024 966% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.09268292683 24% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.155229796869 0.215688989381 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0641517260803 0.103423049105 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0599792488005 0.0843802449381 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.122149566829 0.15604864568 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0730300060595 0.0819641961636 89% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.2329268293 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 61.2550243902 89% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 10.3012195122 96% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.87 11.4140731707 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.06136585366 102% => OK
difficult_words: 50.0 40.7170731707 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.4329268293 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.9970731707 80% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.0658536585 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.