the decline in the number of frogs and different ways which can save their population
The text discusses the decline in the population of frogs and provides three possible ways which can decline the risk of extinction of frogs. On the other hand, the professor goes against all stated ways and explains why she is against them.
First, the text claims that pesticides are one of the main reasons which lead to a decline in the number of frogs. It states that new legislation which prohibit farmers from using lots of these chemical components will help to save the population of this animal. The professor refutes this claim and states that this solution is not economically fair. She continues that if the use of pesticides for some farmers become restricted, they will lose lots of their crops, and their yield will decrease as well. As a result, the cannot compete with other farmers who are allowed to use more pesticides. In this way she states why this method is not fair to some farmers.
Second, as the text, fungus can have a harmful effect on frogs and decline their numbers. It adds that if researches use some treatments which kill fungus, they can save lots of frogs. The professor casts doubt on this point. She states that this treatment should be done on all frogs individually and will be really hard and expensive.She also states that each frog should be captured and be treated which makes this treatment hard. We can also hear from the professor that this method should be applied to all next generations as well which is another reasons for counting this method as a way which cannot be practical.
Third, the text mentions that another reason which caused a decline in the population of frogs is losing their natural habitats. It claims that by protecting natural wetlands and lakes, scientists can decline the risk of frog's extinction. The professor goes against this claim and mentions that saving lakes and marshes cannot assure frogs population. She continues that global warming is one of the main reasons which extincted some species , and doing some projects on saving wetlands cannot save frogs.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-04-16 | degew59415@eryod.com | 3 | view |
| 2018-08-25 | nastaran1992 | 73 | view |
- The text is discussing salvage logging which defines it as a way we aim to deal with dead trees and remove them and provides three reasons of support. The professor goes against all of the explained reasons and tells us why she is against the text. 73
- should we always tell the truth? 73
- The text is about decrease in the number of people who read literature books and explains how it has happened and what are its consequences by providing three reasons. The professor opposes these reasons and goes against all of them and explains why these 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Students are more influenced by their teachers than by their friends.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 70
- television advertising directed towards young children (aged two to five) should not be allowed. 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 337, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: She
...y and will be really hard and expensive.She also states that each frog should be ca...
^^^
Line 7, column 442, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ain reasons which extincted some species , and doing some projects on saving wetla...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, if, really, second, so, third, well, as a result, 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: 16.0 5.04856512141 317% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 22.0 12.0772626932 182% => OK
Pronoun: 41.0 22.412803532 183% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1700.0 1373.03311258 124% => OK
No of words: 348.0 270.72406181 129% => OK
Chars per words: 4.88505747126 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31911543099 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.42343533217 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 145.348785872 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.451149425287 0.540411800872 83% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 495.0 419.366225166 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 3.25607064018 307% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 41.3595928045 49.2860985944 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.0 110.228320801 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.4705882353 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.70588235294 7.06452816374 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => 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: 0.347944595895 0.272083759551 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.121204678089 0.0996497079465 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0993734573755 0.0662205650399 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.239562222614 0.162205337803 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0595241652503 0.0443174109184 134% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 68.1 53.8541721854 126% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.08 12.2367328918 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.71 8.42419426049 92% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.