The golden frog is a small, bright-yellow amphibian that lives in and around mountain streams in Panama. The species is severely endangered because of a fungus that infects the frog through its skin and inhibits the frog's critical life functions, such as breathing Conservationists have proposed a few solutions to the golden frog's fungus problem.
Bacterial Protection
First, scientists have identified a natural enemy of the fungus: a type of bacterium. This bacterium produces a chemical that kills fungal cells. Scientists think that they may be able to introduce colonies of this bacterium to the skin of golden frogs. The bacterial colonies would then protect the frogs against the fungus infection.
Breeding Frogs in Captivity
Second, researchers are considering the possibility of breeding golden frogs in captivity and then releasing them in the wild to replenish wild populations. The golden frog can develop disease-free in captivity, where it is isolated from the fungus. When golden frogs bred in captivity are released in habitats where wild golden frogs have died out, the frog bred in captivity will give rise to a healthy, fungus-free population.
A Natural Defense
Third, it is possible that golden frogs will overcome the threat posed by the fungus without human intervention. Some golden frogs have what seems to be a natural defense against the fungus. When infected, they increase their body temperature, which slows down the growth of the fungus. If this ability to resist the fungal infection spreads among the golden frog population as a whole, the frog population is likely to overcome the crisis and start increasing again.
The golden frog living in Panama is endangered due to the infection of a particular fungus in that area. The reading passage proposes several solutions to solve this problem, but the professor raises that none of them is feasible and provides evidence accordingly.
Firstly, the reading claims that a kind of bacterium that is the natural enemy of the fungus can be applied to eliminate the fungus, and scientists contemplate introducing them to golden frogs' skin. However, the lecturer disagrees with the motion, pointing out that it is an expedient which would not last a very long time. He mentions that this would only work during the early colonization of the bacterium, and after a certain period of time, the colonies would simply stop provide the protection.
Secondly, the author of the reading states that golden frogs can be breaded in captivity being infected by the fungus. After frogs in the wild have died out, these frogs can be released to restore the healthy population. In contrast, the lecturer refutes that after releasing, the frog would not continue to stay healthy, since when they interact with frogs carrying the disease, they would get infected too. Hence, this strategy won't work.
Thirdly, while the reading contends that golden frogs are able to raise their body heat to fight against the fungus without human intervention, the professor maintains that this method has drawbacks. He mentions that increasing the body heat will use up a lot of energy, which will weaken their body, making them ill or die from other causes. Therefore, it is not likely to help the population to recover.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 431, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...n of the bacterium, and after a certain period of time, the colonies would simply stop provide...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, but, first, firstly, hence, however, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, thirdly, while, in contrast, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1354.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 269.0 270.72406181 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03345724907 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0498419064 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52643737477 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.591078066914 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 407.7 419.366225166 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => 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: 51.4108586671 49.2860985944 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.833333333 110.228320801 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.4166666667 21.698381199 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.5 7.06452816374 149% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
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: 0.225712061295 0.272083759551 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0885915160425 0.0996497079465 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.101827858512 0.0662205650399 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.141784154692 0.162205337803 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0684396424799 0.0443174109184 154% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.5 13.3589403974 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.95 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.