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.
The reading and the lecturer are about different ways to control the population of the cane toad in Australia. The author of the reading feels that there are three effective methods to limit the spread of the cane toad. However, the lecturer refutes all of the reading points. He is of the opinion that all the measures are ineffective and unsuccessful in controlling the toad's number.
First of all, the author argues that the first way is by constructing a national fence. In contrast, the lecturer rebuts this by explaining that the fence can not stop the spread of toads. In addition, the lecture point's that the young tods or the eggs are found in the river streams. Even a small number of eggs can be carried across the fence by waterways and multiply their numbers.
Secondly, the writer contends that the volunteers can hunt and kill the frogs. On the other hand, the professor posits that the untrained volunteers can destroy many of the native traits of toads. Moreover, she says that native toad frogs are in endangered.
Finally, the article mentions that scientists are discovering a virus to limit the cane toad population. However, the lecturer, claims that it is a terrible consequence for cane toads. Furthermore, he is of the opinion that many reptiles fly to Central America which carries a virus and spread to native toads. Native toads are an indispensable part of Central America which in turn the whole ecosystem will suffer.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 251, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...ane toad. However, the lecturer refutes all of the reading points. He is of the opinion th...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 291, Rule ID: SMALL_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, use 'a few', or use 'some'
Suggestion: a few; some
...gs are found in the river streams. Even a small number of eggs can be carried across the fence by...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, in addition, in contrast, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1213.0 1373.03311258 88% => OK
No of words: 247.0 270.72406181 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.91093117409 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96437052324 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60391564106 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 127.0 145.348785872 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.514170040486 0.540411800872 95% => OK
syllable_count: 366.3 419.366225166 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More 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: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 19.1687245272 49.2860985944 39% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 80.8666666667 110.228320801 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.4666666667 21.698381199 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.06666666667 7.06452816374 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.160257697095 0.272083759551 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0543095913903 0.0996497079465 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0540867909297 0.0662205650399 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0924163817724 0.162205337803 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0638264829197 0.0443174109184 144% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.9 13.3589403974 74% => 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: 10.9 12.2367328918 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.88 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 63.6247240618 85% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 68.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 20.5 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.