The cane toad is a large (1.8 kg) amphibian species native to Central and South America. It was deliberately introduced to Australia in 1935 with the expectation that it would protect farmers' crops by eating harmful insects. Unfortunately, the toad multiplied rapidly, and a large cane toad population now threatens small native animals that are not pests. Several measures have been proposed to stop the spread of the cane toad in Australia.
One way to prevent the spread of the toad would be to build a national fence. A fence that blocks the advance of the toads will prevent them from moving into those parts of Australia that they have not yet colonized. This approach has been used before: a national fence was erected in the early part of the twentieth century to prevent the spread of rabbits, another animal species that was introduced in Australia from abroad and had a harmful impact on its native ecosystems.
Second, the toads could be captured and destroyed by volunteers. Cane toads can easily be caught in simple traps and can even be captured by hand. Young toads and cane toad eggs are even easier to gather and destroy, since they are restricted to the water. If the Australian government were to organize a campaign among Australian citizens to join forces to destroy the toads, the collective effort might stop the toad from spreading.
Third, researchers are developing a disease-causing virus to control the cane toad populations. This virus will be specially designed: although it will be able to infect a number of reptile and amphibian species, it will not harm most of the infected species; it will specifically harm only the cane toads. The virus will control the population of cane toads by preventing them from maturing and reproducing.
Both the reading passage and the lecture discuss different methods to prevent the spread of the cane toad. While the author of the article presents there ways to stop the rapid growth, the lecturer challenges each of these points made in the article.
First of all, the author mentions that national fence will block the toads from going one place to another place, and thus uncolonized place will be unaffected. He also mentions about the previous success of implementing fence to stop spreading of rabbit. However, the lecture argues that building national fence will be unsuccessful since spreading of cane toads happens mostly by young toads and egg. These two flow from one place to another place through river and stream, and thus employing fence will be useless.
Secondly, the passage states that the rapid growth of toads can be diminished by catching them through traps and killing them by volunteers. In contrast, the speaker asserts that the volunteers are untrained, and they will destroy the native frogs instead of killing cane toads. Those native frogs are endangered species, so the result of this measure will be devastating.
Finally, the reading suggests that the cane toads can be controlled by introducing virus which will stop the maturation and reproduction capability. Though the virus will affect the reptiles and amphibians, it will not harm them. On the other hand, the listening contends that this particular method can cause ecological destruction and affect American native species. Typically reptiles and amphibian species are transported from Australia to South America by researchers and pet collectors. The virus which is introduced will destroy the cane toads there which are native species of America. Thus, this measure will cause an ecological disaster.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 370, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Typically,
...ion and affect American native species. Typically reptiles and amphibian species are tran...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, thus, while, in contrast, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 5.04856512141 277% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => 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: 1516.0 1373.03311258 110% => OK
No of words: 286.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.3006993007 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11236361783 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57533564032 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 151.0 145.348785872 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.527972027972 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 451.8 419.366225166 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 29.0921906283 49.2860985944 59% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 101.066666667 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0666666667 21.698381199 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.6 7.06452816374 108% => OK
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 : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.156031864775 0.272083759551 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0611833809467 0.0996497079465 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0642940239241 0.0662205650399 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0915720448433 0.162205337803 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0514138214821 0.0443174109184 116% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 13.3589403974 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.46 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 70.0 63.6247240618 110% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 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.