Native to Europe and Asia, cheatgrass is an invasive species of grass that is causing problems in North American fields. The plant quickly dominates fields that it has invaded and drives out other plants. This can cause, among other problems, severe damage to animal habitats and scenic areas. Several solutions to the Cheatgrass problem have been proposed by ecologists. One option is to encourage animals such as cattle to feed on cheatgrass. Cattle and other livestock are known as grazers because they graze, or eat. small portions of grass or other plants throughout the day. If grazers were released in fields where cheatgrass is prevalent, the cheatgrass would be reduced Which would create room for native species to re-establish themselves and flourish. This plan is appealing because cheatgrass is most prevalent in areas of North America where cattle and other livestock are raised. Another option is to burn the cheatgrass off the fields with controlled fires. This plan has the advantage of eliminating vast amounts of cheatgrass in a short time Cheatgrass, it turns out? is a highly flammable plant: it burns much more easily than the native plant species that have been crowded out. Strategically set fires could bum away from the cheatgrass where it has come to dominate, creating space so the newly cleared fields could be reseeded with native grasses and other plants. Still another option is to introduce a fungal parasite that specifically attacks cheatgrass. In Europe and Asia, where cheatgrass is a native species, there is a species of fungus that can prevent cheatgrass from reproducing. Introducing this fungus in North American fields where cheatgrass has proliferated could slow the spread of cheatgrass, making it possible for native species to better compete against cheatgrass.
The reading and the writing are both about the Cheatgrass which is a permanent type of grass species that is causing the problem to other habitants of the territory. The author points out that some experts suggested solutions to the reduction of this plant and explained it in detail. The lecturer in the listening passage disagrees. He believes that the solutions provided by the author are not practical and do not work well.
First, the author claims that the Cheatgrass should be introduced to the pasture of the cattle because these mammals are known to be grazers. The lecturer, however, disagrees with this viewpoint. He says that even though the cattle prefer to eat grasses, they will dislike the Cheatgrass. He goes on to say that as a result, only native grasses that mammals eat often will decrease.
Second, the author states that people could burn the Cheatgrass in controllable fire areas, so this burned site will be empty and create a new habitat for other species, which in turn will decrease the Cheatgrass population. The professor in the listening passage is doubtful that this is accurate. He suggests that the seeds of this particular plant germinate beneath the underground. If the fire burns the remaining Cheatgrass, as a result, the sprout of this plant will start to grow after the fire.
Finally, the author notes that a fungal parasite, which is an enemy of the Cheatgrass, will reduce its increasing numbers. The lecturer rebuts this argument. He says that even though the parasite is not aligned with a certain plant, they have been in the same habitat for a long time. Furthermore, he argues that some Cheatgrass plants may have resistance to the fungal parasites because it can only harm weak and sickly plants.
To sum up, both the author and the lecturer hold conflicting views about the Cheatgrass plant.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 286, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... this plant and explained it in detail. The lecturer in the listening passage disag...
^^^
Line 2, column 358, Rule ID: ADVERB_WORD_ORDER[9]
Message: The adverb 'often' is usually put before the verb 'eat'.
Suggestion: often eat
...esult, only native grasses that mammals eat often will decrease. Second, the author stat...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, second, so, well, as a result, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 22.412803532 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1537.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 311.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 4.9421221865 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19942759058 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58332464799 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 145.348785872 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.524115755627 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 453.6 419.366225166 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.9848109698 49.2860985944 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.4117647059 110.228320801 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2941176471 21.698381199 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.41176470588 7.06452816374 77% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => 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 : 13.0 4.45695364238 292% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.196802362008 0.272083759551 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0608126221403 0.0996497079465 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0519433018874 0.0662205650399 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.109424876063 0.162205337803 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0473736466758 0.0443174109184 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.0 13.3589403974 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.37 12.2367328918 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.03 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.