In 1995 a microscopic fungus called phytophthora ramorum, or P. ramorum, was first detected in the forests of the western United States. P. ramorum infects trees and causes particularly serious damage in oak trees: in many infected oaks, leaves wither rapidly, large cracks appear in the bark, and the trees die. A spread of P. ramorum represents a serious threat to the forests in the western states. Several methods of protecting the forests have been proposed.
First, stopping P. ramorum spores from spreading would surely be an effective method. Spores are small particles through which all fungi, including P. ramorum, reproduce. Researchers have discovered that many P. ramorum spores can be found along hiking or biking trails, suggesting human-assisted spread by way of shoes and bicycle tires. A few measures to prevent such human-assisted spread-like encouraging hikers to wash their shoes and installing new bike scrubbers on bicycle trails-would be an effective and low-cost way to stop the spread of P. ramorum.
The reading and the lecture are both discussing certain a type of fungus called P. ramorum. The reading presents three methods to protect forests from the serious threat of these fungi. The lecturer significantly opposes the methods and claims that they are in-effective.
To begin with, the writer suggests that few precautions should be taken to prevent the human-assisted spread of these fungi. However, the professor claims that although these methods might work but it will not cause a huge impact, because fungi do not only spread by human, but most of them are picked by rain water into water streams. This as she says, is more difficult to control.
Furthermore, the discussion transitions into using fungicidal chemicals to protect the oak trees. Once more, the speaker dismisses this idea. She states that there chemicals work only when they are injected directly into the tree trunk and lasts for few months. Thus, those chemicals are needed to be injected often and this process is very expensive. Additionally, it might work for small number of trees in a pack but is impractical for forests.
Last but not least, the writer presents posits using a practice called clear-cutting. This starts by cutting and burning diseased oaks involving the vegetation surrounding the oaks. The final word of contrast is offered by the lecturer. She rebuts this by mentioning that healthy vegetation are severely effected too, despite that fact that some of the bushes are healthy. Cutting them might cause a greater economic damage than the damage cause by P. ramorum.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 187, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...from the serious threat of these fungi. The lecturer significantly opposes the meth...
^^^
Line 13, column 342, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...ly effected too, despite that fact that some of the bushes are healthy. Cutting them might ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, however, if, so, thus, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1326.0 1373.03311258 97% => OK
No of words: 257.0 270.72406181 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.15953307393 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00390054096 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62207156218 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.583657587549 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 394.2 419.366225166 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 38.4264211676 49.2860985944 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.875 110.228320801 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.0625 21.698381199 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.375 7.06452816374 48% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.123762862872 0.272083759551 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0264998132411 0.0996497079465 27% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0309446611884 0.0662205650399 47% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.073096148402 0.162205337803 45% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0488228237939 0.0443174109184 110% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 13.3589403974 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 53.8541721854 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.35 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.55 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.