In the 1950s Torreya taxifoha, a type of evergreen tree once very common in the state of Florida, started to die out. No one is sure exactly what caused the decline, but chances are good that if nothing is done, Torreya will soon become extinct. Experts are considering three ways to address the decline of Torreya.
The first option is to reestablish Torreya in the same location in which it thrived for thousands of years. Torreya used to be found in abundance in the northern part of Florida, which has a specific microclimate. A microclimate exists when weather conditions inside a relatively small area differ from the region of which that area is a part. Northern Florida’s microclimate is very favorable to Torreya’s growth. The microclimate is wetter and cooler than the surrounding region’s relatively dry, warm climate. Scientists have been working to plant Torreya seeds in the coolest, dampest areas of the microclimate.
The second option is to move Torreya to an entirely different location, far from its Florida microclimate. Torreya seeds and sapling have been successfully planted and grown in forests further north, where the temperature is significantly cooler. Some scientists believe that Torreya probably thrived in areas much further north in the distant past, so by relocating it now, in a process known as assisted migration, humans would simply be helping Torreya return to an environment that is more suited to its survival.
The third option is to preserve Torreya in research centers. Seeds and saplings can be moved from the wild and preserved in a closely monitored environment where it will be easier for scientists both to protect the species and conduct research on Torreya. This research can then be used to ensure the continued survival of the species.
The reading and lecture contradict each other for reasons behind the decline of Terreya taxifoha tree which was once common in Florida.
First of all, the article establishes the opinion that Torreya trees need to be replanted in the same places where it once flourished for thousands of years. This was noted in the northern part of Florida which has a particular cooler environment called microclimate, which in turn, favors the survival of Torreya tree. However, the lecturer points out and refutes that these are unlikely to succeed because of increased global warming. As a result, it led to many large cooler areas to change into warmer areas. In addition, many areas in Florida are also becoming arid. Hence the lecture refutes the reading point.
Next, the article avers that by relocating the Torreya tree to a new different place which is far from the Florida climate may help to save the Torreya tree. This is evident in Terreya blooming when they moved to the forest where the temperature was cool. On the other hand, the speaker rebuts and explains that earlier humans moved black locaus tree to the north environment, which spread quickly and killed many other species. Therefore, he says that unpredicted consequences may happen when we move a plant to entirely new circumstances.
Last but not least, the writer contends that Torreya may be preserved in research centers for monitoring and preserving. This also enhances researchers to conduct experiments and save Torreya trees. In contrast, the lectures posit that the trees need to in the relative genetic and larger area to resist the disease. Hence, moving to research center won't be apt for the trees to resist the disease and survive on a long term basis.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 573, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...reas in Florida are also becoming arid. Hence the lecture refutes the reading point. ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 433, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...sease and survive on a long term basis.
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, may, so, therefore, as to, in addition, in contrast, as a result, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1453.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 289.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0276816609 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12310562562 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52035213852 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 168.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.581314878893 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 445.5 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.4031490059 49.2860985944 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.8666666667 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2666666667 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.0 7.06452816374 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.149412946292 0.272083759551 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0486516921931 0.0996497079465 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0456807657563 0.0662205650399 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0965459945683 0.162205337803 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0213727399378 0.0443174109184 48% => 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: 11.9 13.3589403974 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.89 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.95 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 63.6247240618 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.