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.
Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.
The diagrams compare the main causes of land degradation universally and particularly in three regions around the world over a span of 10 years.
Looking from the overall perspective, during the 1990s more than half of the farmland was degraded by over-grazing and deforestation, which accounts for 35% and 30% respectively. Excessive cultivation constitutes 28% of the total amount of harmed land and the remaining 7% of agricultural territories became less productive for other reasons.
These reasons affected various regions differently in the 1990s: in North America, only 5% of the land was damaged overall, where the most dramatic effect was caused by over-cultivation of crops. Europe and Oceania have substantially opposite patterns, whereas the whole degraded farmland in Europe was totaling approximately 23%, Oceania has almost double less harmed land.
Moreover, it is of note that there is a downward trend among European agricultural causes. The land degraded by tree-cutting accounts for the largest share, equaling to 9,8%, less than 8% was suffered from excessive crop treatment and only 5.5 % was damaged due to over-grazing. As opposed to Europe, Oceania has no land overuse in cultivating purposes, the minimal harm is brought due to tree-cleaning (1,7%). During the 1990s land was mainly plagued by the overspread of cattle breeding, which is making up 11%.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, look, moreover, so, whereas, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 7.0 157% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 33.7804878049 107% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 3.97073170732 126% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1181.0 965.302439024 122% => OK
No of words: 218.0 196.424390244 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.41743119266 4.92477711251 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.84250218741 3.73543355544 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.07092478125 2.65546596893 116% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 106.607317073 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.637614678899 0.547539520022 116% => OK
syllable_count: 354.6 283.868780488 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.4926829268 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.3777854038 43.030603864 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.222222222 112.824112599 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2222222222 22.9334400587 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.22222222222 5.23603664747 81% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 3.70975609756 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 1.13902439024 615% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.192645804996 0.215688989381 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0824707426193 0.103423049105 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0610326192088 0.0843802449381 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.13993397549 0.15604864568 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0377604799904 0.0819641961636 46% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.2329268293 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 61.2550243902 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.3012195122 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.45 11.4140731707 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.75 8.06136585366 121% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 40.7170731707 167% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 11.4329268293 136% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.9970731707 105% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.0658536585 145% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.