Genetically modified trees
In this set of materials, both the reading passage and the lecture discussed genetically modified trees and their effects on related parts of the world. The article firmly stated that globally planting genetically modified trees in large scale has many benefits. However, the lecture repudiated what stated in the reading resting upon fallacious premises and provides three counterclaims proofing that it might produce serious problems if people try it out in that large scale.
Firstly, the reading argued that as new types of trees are designed to be harder than traditional ones, they will survive better in case of any problem occurred. The lecture contradicted this point by acknowledging that it is very probable for the plants in general to attack by an unknown virus or infection and as all the genetically modified trees are similar to each other, all will wipe out suddenly. He pointed out that in nature for the sake of genetic diversion that has been widespread among trees; probably some individual trees might survive and ensure the existence of other types in coming years.
Secondly, the reading claimed that planting genetically modified trees would have some economic benefits. Notwithstanding, the professor highlighted that as farmers have to pay some companies for buying that special seeds, moreover, because of some laws they are not able to reproduce the plant by collecting their seeds for next year, actually all the time they have to spend money.
Lastly, the reading passage contended that planting the aforementioned trees would save the endangered native trees in some ways. This seemed to be incorrect as explained in the lecture. The speaker articulated that unfortunately the result would be opposite. The professor explained that as genetically modified trees will grow aggressively, native trees have to compete with them for their resources like soil, sunlight, water etc.; therefore, this is not seemed to be beneficial for the wildlife of the region..
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 513, Rule ID: DOUBLE_PUNCTUATION
Message: Two consecutive dots
Suggestion: .
...eneficial for the wildlife of the region..
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, in general
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => 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: 1684.0 1373.03311258 123% => OK
No of words: 317.0 270.72406181 117% => OK
Chars per words: 5.31230283912 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21953715646 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75051368984 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 145.348785872 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.548895899054 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 522.0 419.366225166 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 21.2450331126 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 70.2014462497 49.2860985944 142% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.333333333 110.228320801 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.4166666667 21.698381199 122% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.33333333333 7.06452816374 118% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.391912704685 0.272083759551 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.167100638833 0.0996497079465 168% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.146350668146 0.0662205650399 221% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.252765292147 0.162205337803 156% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0587330002791 0.0443174109184 133% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 13.3589403974 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 53.8541721854 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.0289183223 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.81 12.2367328918 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.36 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 89.0 63.6247240618 140% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.498013245 118% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.