The pie charts and table give information about the total value sources of fish imported to the US between 1988 and 2000.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The given pie charts and table illustrate about the net value origins of fish imported to the US from 1988 to 2000.
Overall, it can be seen that while the import of fish from 'China' and 'Others' surged significantly, there was a considerable dip in the import from 'Canada'. Another striking feature is that the total value also soared throughout the term in the question.
In detail, Canada stood at exactly three fifths (60%) of the total in 1988, which made it number one country in the export rate. Despite being the primary nation in 1988, the subsequent years saw a dramatic shrink to finish the period (2000) at nearly one third (28%). Surprisingly, this nation was on the bottom of all. On the other hand, even though China ranked third in 1988 with 13%, the figure swell markedly to 30% in 2000, approximately doubled.
Turning to 'Others', with 27% in 1988, there was a sharp rise in 1992, rocketing to around half (46%) in 1992. Interestingly, 46% was the greatest net as compared to Canada (34%) and China (20%). Having hit a peak, however, witnessed a bit slid in the final year to 42%, still making it (42%) the top most country in the import rate.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
which made it number one country
which made it the number one country
Having hit a peak, however, witnessed a bit slid in the final year to 42%,
Having hit a peak, however, it witnessed a bit slid in the final year to 42%,
flaws:
Where is the content for the first picture 'total value'?
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 6.5 out of 9
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 2 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 10 10
No. of Words: 207 200
No. of Characters: 896 1000
No. of Different Words: 126 100
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 3.793 4.0
Average Word Length: 4.329 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.342 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 57 60
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 29 50
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 17 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 10 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.7 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.587 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.368 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.631 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.067 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 4
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, so, still, third, well, while, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 38.0 33.7804878049 112% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 945.0 965.302439024 98% => OK
No of words: 207.0 196.424390244 105% => OK
Chars per words: 4.5652173913 4.92477711251 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.79308509922 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.38528007089 2.65546596893 90% => OK
Unique words: 130.0 106.607317073 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.628019323671 0.547539520022 115% => OK
syllable_count: 267.3 283.868780488 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => 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: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 28.8790581564 43.030603864 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.5 112.824112599 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7 22.9334400587 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.7 5.23603664747 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 3.70975609756 189% => 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: 0.182016311984 0.215688989381 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0691121858146 0.103423049105 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0930186202307 0.0843802449381 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.137761992548 0.15604864568 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.118057218376 0.0819641961636 144% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.4 13.2329268293 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 76.56 61.2550243902 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 10.3012195122 74% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.23 11.4140731707 81% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.91 8.06136585366 98% => OK
difficult_words: 43.0 40.7170731707 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => 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.