act to restrict fishing of the menhaden
The article and the lecture focus on the implementation of the government act to restrict fishing of the menhaden to protect them from overfishing. The author provided explanations of why this action will not lead to the desired result. The lecturer disputes the claims made in the article. His position is that taking into account the latest research the conclusions should be reexamined.
In the reading, the author begins by stating that the striped bass, a natural predator of the menhaden, could be the reason for reducing in its population. And the proposed restrictions would not have any effect on this predator. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. He claims that according to the natural rule of equilibrium the balance between predator and prey will be found.
Secondly, the author suggests that the fishing ban could lead to a break in the supply chain. The lecturer, however, asserts that the menhaden could be substituted with other fish. Hence, as the menhaden is not only food for livestock, restrictions will not lead to problems with supply.
Finally, another reason why the author feels that the fishing ban is a bad idea is that it could lead to unemployment among those who involved in fishing menhaden. The professor is doubtful that this is an accurate assumption. He suggests that fishermen could just change the type of fish they catch. Moreover, he mentions that taking into account that this is temporary restrictions, there should not be harmful consequences for employment.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 238, 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.
...on will not lead to the desired result. The lecturer disputes the claims made in th...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, hence, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1280.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 249.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.140562249 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97237131171 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79477100815 2.5805825403 108% => OK
Unique words: 135.0 145.348785872 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.542168674699 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 378.0 419.366225166 90% => 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: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.3041388823 49.2860985944 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 85.3333333333 110.228320801 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.6 21.698381199 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.93333333333 7.06452816374 56% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => 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: 0.301172677815 0.272083759551 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0896431286137 0.0996497079465 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.11631536123 0.0662205650399 176% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.181454775843 0.162205337803 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0684021339197 0.0443174109184 154% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.3589403974 83% => 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: 12.24 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.68 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => 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.