frogs and fungus
The reading passage talks about the golden frog which is endangered because of a fungus that will infect it through its skin, and several ideas are given to solve this problem. As reasonable as these points seem, the professor in the lecture casts doubt on them, indicating that all won't be effective.
To begin with, the author suggests that we can add a type of bacterium which can kill the fungus by producing a chemical on frogs' skins. Conversely, disputing the reading's point, the lecturer claims that the effect of the fungus won't be permanent. Since the bacteria will only produce the chemical for a short period, the lecturer believes that this method is unlikely to entirely solve the problem.
Second, the lecturer acutely identifies a weakness in the article that we can raise and release captive frogs, which are immune to the fungus. She points out that this won't let the population stay healthy. In addition, there are other wild animals that might infect the frog with other kinds of diseases after they contact them. Accordingly, the lecturer disagrees with this idea.
Last but not least, even though the lecturer concurs with the author that it will be helpful to kill the fungus by naturally heating the body temperature of some frogs, she argues that this isn't good for the overall health of the frogs. This is because frogs need to use massive energy to increase their temperature, which probably will weaken them and thus make them get ill or even die easily. As a result, the lecturer states that this idea isn't likely to help the frogs overcome the crisis.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 191, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...ure of some frogs, she argues that this isnt good for the overall health of the frog...
^^^^
Line 4, column 445, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...ult, the lecturer states that this idea isnt likely to help the frogs overcome the c...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, but, conversely, if, second, so, thus, in addition, as a result, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 22.412803532 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1312.0 1373.03311258 96% => OK
No of words: 272.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 4.82352941176 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.30670331649 2.5805825403 89% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 145.348785872 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.577205882353 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 402.3 419.366225166 96% => 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: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 47.5596117169 49.2860985944 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 109.333333333 110.228320801 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6666666667 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.58333333333 7.06452816374 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
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: 0.250832226593 0.272083759551 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0904688099189 0.0996497079465 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0794377771501 0.0662205650399 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.17186478593 0.162205337803 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0244556811576 0.0443174109184 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.97 12.2367328918 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.27 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.