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.
Second, there are a few fungicidal (fungus-fighting) chemicals that can be used to protect the oak trees. Some of these chemicals stimulate the oak trees’ natural defenses against the P. ramorum fungus and have been found in small-scale tryouts to significantly reduce the likelihood that the oaks will be infected.
A third way to fight P. ramorum is a practice called clear-cutting. This approach starts with cutting and burning the diseased oaks, but it also involves cutting and burning the seemingly healthy vegetation (bushes and other kinds of trees) surrounding the oaks. This is done because some of the surrounding plants and trees may be infected even though they do not show any symptoms of the disease. Cleaning large areas of vegetation in places where diseased trees are found is often an efficient measure to stop the spread of infections.
The reading and lecture are about the three methods utilized for insulating trees from the fungus named P.ramorum. In the article, three possible ways to protect floras from the disease caused by the fungus. The lecturer is the opinion of these methods are efficacy.
Firstly, the author mentions that the fungus are spread with assistance of human since it is attached to the individuals who bike or saunter to the forest, then it sweeps to the forest. Therefore, motivating people to wash their boots and change scrubbers would stop the spread. This specific argument was challenged by the lecturer. She claims that the idea will not stop the distribution since the fungus are dispersed by the water also. Moreover, regulating the water movement in order to prevent from the disease is arduous.
Secondly, in the passage, it is stated that chemical which confines the fungus to pose disease to the vegetation can be utilized so that the immune of the plants against disease will improve. The lecturer, nonetheless, refutes this idea by claiming that, since influence of injection is not ever-lasting, the chemicals must be employed regularly. Furthermore, injecting myriads of trees periodically would require magnitude of budget and endeavor although it might be appropriate method for using on few trees.
Finally, the author states that infected plants and its surrounding vegetation can be cut in order to stop contagious illness of flora because other creatures near to the trees might be infected with fungus. However, the lecturer rebuts this idea by mentioning that healthy creatures will probably be destroyed. Furthermore, there are three unique species of tree in the forest where the method would be utilized. Thereby, more serious damage will be posed ,because the rare trees and healthy floras may be crippled, if the proposed idea is followed.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 435, Rule ID: ALSO_SENT_END[1]
Message: 'Also' is not used at the end of the sentence. Use 'as well' instead.
Suggestion: as well
...e the fungus are dispersed by the water also. Moreover, regulating the water movemen...
^^^^
Line 5, column 162, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...tilized so that the immune of the plants against disease will improve. The lectur...
^^
Line 7, column 457, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ereby, more serious damage will be posed ,because the rare trees and healthy flora...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, nonetheless, second, secondly, so, then, therefore
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 10.4613686534 201% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 13.0 5.04856512141 257% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1570.0 1373.03311258 114% => OK
No of words: 300.0 270.72406181 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23333333333 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16179145029 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.66131963924 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.553333333333 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 485.1 419.366225166 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
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: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.0528199161 49.2860985944 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.666666667 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0 21.698381199 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.46666666667 7.06452816374 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.141453431514 0.272083759551 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0447058124367 0.0996497079465 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0456691457573 0.0662205650399 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0824014606698 0.162205337803 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0376255265178 0.0443174109184 85% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.3589403974 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.05 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.47 8.42419426049 112% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 63.6247240618 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.