There is little justification for society to make extraordinary efforts—especially at a great cost in money and jobs—to save endangered animal or plant species?
Both Flora and fauna play major roles in societies’ health and business. Although believing that there is paltry justification for society to make comprehensive efforts to save endangered animal or plant species, many people disagree with this statement because keeping endangered species, plants or animals, play a fundamental role in growing businesses and ecological materials.
First and foremost, it has been elucidated by variegated documents that endangered species’ protection or nurture could bolster societies’ business or financial materials. Many countries in the world are dependent to tourism industry. For instance, in South Africa, protected flora and fauna have been playing major roles in booming local businesses by attracting tourists. From around the world, many people coming to this country to see unique animals which are deemed as extinct in other places. Not only can it improve local businesses such as hotels, public transportation, and so forth, but also it could provide a great amount of profits for the government. Thus, keeping endangered species could provide this opportunity for various governments to augment their profits derived from the related industries.
Secondly, by and large, keeping endangered species from extinction not only could help scientists to keep ecological issues in balance but also halters unwarranted effects related to the convoluted ecological networks. For example, according to historical documents, after the population of Tasmanian tigers in Indonesia dropped, the number of Mice increasingly escalated and as a consequence, crop production decreased. In those years, Indonesia’s government declared that crop exports took a nosedive. Therefore, based on the example, it seems fair to suggest that protection of endangered animals or plants have a great impression on ecological cycles.
On the other hand, despite the fact that protection of endangered species is an appropriate principal that governments should do germane to business, applying extraordinary efforts, particularly at a great money or cost, in health and educational fields, apparently is advantageous because a large number of people could use the achievements in their daily lives. Thus, costing vast money on protecting endangered species seems unwarranted and inappropriate.
In the final analysis, while many people think that there is a negligible justification for various societies to make extraordinary efforts to keep endangered animal or plant species, others repudiate this idea because not only can protection of endangered species help governments to improve their businesses, but also it may help them to keep the ecological interactions in a standstill condition; However, governments should pay attention to education and health fields as equal as efforts to protect endangered species.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 498, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ernment declared that crop exports took a nosedive. Therefore, based on the example, it se...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 291, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...lds, apparently is advantageous because a large number of people could use the achievements in th...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, thus, while, for example, for instance, such as, by and large, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 15.1003584229 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 9.8082437276 102% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 13.8261648746 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.0286738351 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 43.0788530466 49% => OK
Preposition: 52.0 52.1666666667 100% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 8.0752688172 248% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2453.0 1977.66487455 124% => OK
No of words: 420.0 407.700716846 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.84047619048 4.8611393121 120% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52701905584 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18620449641 2.67179642975 119% => OK
Unique words: 222.0 212.727598566 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.528571428571 0.524837075471 101% => OK
syllable_count: 762.3 618.680645161 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.51630824373 119% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 9.59856630824 21% => OK
Article: 1.0 3.08781362007 32% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.86738351254 161% => OK
Preposition: 10.0 4.94265232975 202% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 20.6003584229 73% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 28.0 20.1344086022 139% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 119.819679333 48.9658058833 245% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 163.533333333 100.406767564 163% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.0 20.6045352989 136% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.2 5.45110844103 205% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.53405017921 110% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.5376344086 36% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 11.8709677419 84% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.85842293907 26% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.308667176916 0.236089414692 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0924535744688 0.076458572812 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0810938841828 0.0737576698707 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.179821291041 0.150856017488 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0587471776057 0.0645574589148 91% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 20.1 11.7677419355 171% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 26.14 58.1214874552 45% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.10430107527 213% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.6 10.1575268817 163% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.89 10.9000537634 155% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.8 8.01818996416 122% => OK
difficult_words: 127.0 86.8835125448 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 10.002688172 125% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.0537634409 131% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.247311828 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 Out of 30
---------------------
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.