Both the reading and the lecture is about the methods which can be effective for protecting oak trees from a fungus called P.ramorum which causes serious damage to trees. The reading provides three methods. However, the lecture casts doubt on the claims and refutes each method.
First, the reading states that it can be effective if they can stop the fungus spores to be spread. It says that hiking areas are the one reason for spreading and people cause spreading with their bikes and shoes. The lecture opposes this idea by explaining that people only have a small effect on spreading spores. The real reason is rainfalls. Rainwater carries spores to long distances and it is very difficult to control it.
Second, the reading states that chemicals that can be injected to trees can work to stop infection. This point is challenged in the lecture by saying that it would be impossible to inject every single tree in the forest. Furthermore, the injection needs to be repeated every three months. This method is not practical because besides it is hard to inject every tree, it would not be cost effective.
Third, the reading claims that clear-cutting practice can work to stop spreading spores. The lecture refutes this method by saying that burning and cutting infected trees with some other nearby trees, are not known if they are infected or not, can cause greater damage. Some trees in that forests are found very rare and cutting them can cause ecological damage that they might not come back again. According to the lecture, this method can destroy rare trees.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, first, furthermore, however, if, second, so, third
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => 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: 1315.0 1373.03311258 96% => OK
No of words: 267.0 270.72406181 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92509363296 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.04229324003 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.30263683078 2.5805825403 89% => OK
Unique words: 136.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.50936329588 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 387.0 419.366225166 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 40.138821607 49.2860985944 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.1875 110.228320801 75% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.6875 21.698381199 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.6875 7.06452816374 52% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.134055388531 0.272083759551 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0404937243481 0.0996497079465 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0621631026896 0.0662205650399 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0880116008384 0.162205337803 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0579934786679 0.0443174109184 131% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.1 13.3589403974 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 72.16 53.8541721854 134% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 11.0289183223 65% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.02 12.2367328918 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.62 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 63.6247240618 85% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 71.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.5 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.