Both the reading and the lecture are about genetically modified trees which are modified genetically. While the author of the passage argues that genetically modifed trees bring some benefits, the professor disputes this claim. She states that although it seems that modifying trees geentically seems very lucrative at the first glance, by looking closely to this issue some serious problems are revealed. The lecturer casts doubt on the main points made in the reading by providing three reasons.
In the passage, the author begins by syaing that these modifed trees are more tough than their natural counterparts and tend to be more resistant against predators such as pests. The lecturer, however, disagrees with this idea. She mentions that these trees may survive some certain conditions as all trees do. Moreover, she says that when an anomaly happens, such as new pests' invasion or climate change, some species of natural trees usually survive, but in the case of genetically modified trees, since they are all genetically unifrom, non of them could survive.
Furthermore, according to the reading genetically modifed trees bring some economic benefits for their owner as they produce more fruits or other products than natural trees. On the other hand, the professor points out that the seeds of these trees are much more expensive than the seeds of their natural peer. Also, by the law, the farmers are forbiden to plant the seed produced by these trees; if they want to plant the new seeds, they have to pay for it beforehand.
Finally, the author brings his argument to a close by suggesting that genetically modifed trees can save the endangered natural trees by satisfying the human-being demand for wood since they grow much rapidly than natural trees. Not surprisingly, the professor takes issue with this claim by contending that they are even more dangerous for natural trees as they grow aggressively. She mentions that these trees outcompete natural trees for resources and make them perish gradually.
To sum up, both the writer and the lecturer hold confliciting views on genetically modified trees.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 373, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'pests'' or 'pest's'?
Suggestion: pests'; pest's
...at when an anomaly happens, such as new pests invasion or climate change, some specie...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, look, may, moreover, so, while, such as, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 22.412803532 170% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => 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: 1789.0 1373.03311258 130% => OK
No of words: 344.0 270.72406181 127% => OK
Chars per words: 5.20058139535 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.30665032142 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53512206848 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.517441860465 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 542.7 419.366225166 129% => 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: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 2.5761589404 272% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.6319401897 49.2860985944 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.266666667 110.228320801 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9333333333 21.698381199 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.13333333333 7.06452816374 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
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: 0.229861747766 0.272083759551 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0869758369095 0.0996497079465 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0496145364262 0.0662205650399 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.131936212594 0.162205337803 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0445474058135 0.0443174109184 101% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 13.3589403974 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.22 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 63.6247240618 119% => 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?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.