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 reading passage and lecture discuss whether preventive measures should be taken for reducing the number of the cane toad in Australia. The former argues that there are three ways of decreasing the cane toad, but the later refutes each of these points.
First of all, the author of the passage claims that through constructing the national fence, it is possible to thwart the moving of the cane toad in other areas and in the past, Australia used this technique for stopping the expansions of rabbits. However, the lecture contends that it would be very unsuccessful project. As the eggs of the cane toad and many youngs are staying in the stream and they can move to another places through water ways, there would be no fruitful benefits of building fence in some areas.
Secondly, the text asserts that volunteer efforts can be used to capture and destroy ted eggs and young teds, which is a very easy task. In contrast, the listening counters that if the people have not any training regarding this, they can capture native specices like Australian original young frogs rather than ted. Therefore, this is not a good way to remove animals.
In third, the reading passage states that it is possible to make hindrance of maturing and reproducing of cane ted populations by pushing disease-contains virus. Though it infects other species, but causes ultimate distress to ted only. On the other hand, the lecturer mentions that sometimes certain animals are transporting to another countries for example, reptiles and amphibians are trasferred to America. Hence, if these animals contais dangerous virus, then it can trasmit it to the native American species like cane ted which is vital wildlife creature for maintaing whole ecosystems.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 399, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
..., reptiles and amphibians are trasferred to America. Hence, if these animals cont...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, however, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, third, for example, in contrast, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1462.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 288.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07638888889 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56691880375 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.59375 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 447.3 419.366225166 107% => 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: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.9779627568 49.2860985944 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.833333333 110.228320801 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 21.698381199 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 12.1666666667 7.06452816374 172% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.132244002989 0.272083759551 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.045496857624 0.0996497079465 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0358480315418 0.0662205650399 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0810659952829 0.162205337803 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0456162518746 0.0443174109184 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 13.3589403974 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.48 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.05 8.42419426049 107% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 63.6247240618 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 26.5 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.