The cane toad is a large (1.8kg) 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 load 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 specially harm only the cane toads. The virus will control the population of cane toads by preventing them from maturing and reproducing.
The cane toad won’t be as easy to get rid of as the reading suggests. The measures proposed by the reading are likely either to be unsuccessful or to cause unwanted environmental damage.
First of all, a national fence probably won’t stop the spread of the toad. That’s because young toads and toad eggs are found in rivers and streams. No matter where the fence is located, at some point there will be rivers or streams flowing from one side to the other. These waterways will be able to carry the youn toads and their eggs to the other side.
Since it’s only necessary for a few young toads or eggs to get through the fence in order to establish population on the other side, the fence is unlikely to be effective.
Secondly, a massive group of volunteers
could have success trapping and destroying toads. But it’s likely that these untrained volunteers would inadvertently destroy many of Australia’s native frogs. Some of which are endangered. It’s not always easy to tell the cane toad apart from native frogs especially when it’s young.
Third, using the virus is a bad idea because it could have terrible consequences for cane toads in their original habitat in Central and South America. You might be wondering: how can a virus released in Australia cause harm in the Americas? Well, Australian reptiles and amphibians are often transported to other continents by researchers or pet collectors for example. Once the animals infected by the virus reach Central and South America, the virus will attack the native cane toads and devastate their populations. That would be and ecological disaster because in the America cane toads are a native species and a vital part of the ecosystem. So if they are eliminated, the whole ecosystem will suffer.
Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on specific solutions presented in the reading passage.
In regard to the issue of some methods to stop the spread of the cane toad in Australia. The reading passage points out that there are some measures that are possible to stop the spread effectively. Whereas, the writer and the lecturer are apparently sheer contradictory to each other.
Firstly, according to the author, building a national fence can prevent the toad from moving into the parts that they have not colonized in Australia, also this way was used for prohibiting rabbits and other animals introduced from abroad to impact the native ecosystem in Australia. The speaker, however, disclaims the point of view and declares that it is impossible to stop young toads because of streams and rivers, water waves could carry young toads and egg to get through to the other side of the fence.
Secondly, the reading holds that since cane toads can easily be captured by simple traps and even by hands, and young toads and toad eggs are restricted to the water, it would be easier to destroy them. Thus, the government can organize some volunteers to capture them. By contrast, the professor disproves the claim of reading, demonstrating that those untrained citizens may destroy other Australian native species, it is also dangerous. Besides this, it is not easy to capture them, especially when toads are young.
Finally, the article asserts that cane toad populations can be controlled by a disease-causing virus, this virus can stop them from maturing and reproducing. On the other hand, the listening maintains an opposite opinion that it is an awful idea because it may also damage other origin species. Additionally, people often transport their species from Australian to other continents. and once one of those species gets infected, it would attack the native species there. Therefore, the whole ecosystem will be suffered.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 384, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: And
...es from Australian to other continents. and once one of those species gets infected...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, besides, finally, first, firstly, however, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, whereas, in regard to, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 5.04856512141 218% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => 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: 1545.0 1373.03311258 113% => OK
No of words: 302.0 270.72406181 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11589403974 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1687104957 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6552761074 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.566225165563 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 475.2 419.366225166 113% => 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: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.3028379976 49.2860985944 135% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.357142857 110.228320801 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5714285714 21.698381199 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.3571428571 7.06452816374 147% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0711639806993 0.272083759551 26% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.027199927604 0.0996497079465 27% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0380326835935 0.0662205650399 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0493946386778 0.162205337803 30% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0279954328757 0.0443174109184 63% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 13.3589403974 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.7 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 63.6247240618 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.