Nutria is a beaver-like rat, sized approximately 24 inches long, growing up to 20 pounds, and usually living in semi-aquatic habitats. This creature originated in South America but is now widely spread throughout the ecosystem, becoming an annoying pest that harms the environment. Several solutions to prevent nutrias have been proposed in response.
One way is to use strong fences and walls made out of hard materials. Since nutrias have strong teeth to chew off wooden or Styrofoam structures, metal fences and walls can be effective. This would prevent nutrias from damaging farms, lawns, and gardens. Once they are installed, an extra maintenance fee would not be necessary, which means it is also reasonable in terms of price.
The second way is to dry up the drainage. Any place where water is running can be an attractive place for nutrias to use as a habitat or a travel route. Consequently, removing water from drainage could stop the nutrias from populating the place. Such a measure would be effective, especially in highlands where drainage systems are frequently used for growing sugar canes or rice crops. This is because, in contrast to lowlands, water does not stream permanently in high sites.
The third method is to cook nutrias for food. Unlike common thoughts, nutria meat has a tender texture, making it a favorable delicacy to the dinner table. Nutrias are also very nutritious. They contain high amounts of proteins and carbohydrates and low levels of fat and cholesterol than other domestic animals. For example, beef has less than 17 grams of protein per 100 grams, while nutrias contain an average of 22 grams.
The reading passage and the lecture both discuss the solutions to prevent nutrias from damaging people's properties and the environment. The reading passage presents three possible solutions and makes them look very effective in serving the purpose. The lecturer disputes the level of effectiveness presented in the passage. His position is that the methods may not be as successful as expected by the author.
According to the reading passage, building strong fences and walls out of hard materials will prevent the nutrias from damaging people's properties. The article mentions that the nutrias will not be able to chew off metal fences and walls as easily as they can chew off wooden or styrofoam walls. Also in author's opinion, this will require no maintenance afterwards making the solution affordable. This argument is challenged by the lecturer. He states that nutrias are very at digging as they have sharp claws. No mater how high the walls are buit, they can still go into the privately owned lands by digging underground. This outstanding digging capability of nutrias make the idea of building walls and fences around the lands look redundant. They can always dig underground and damage people's properties.
Secondly, the author suggests that drying up the drainage systems in highlands can discourage the nutrias from using these drain as a habitat or a travel route. The lecturer, however, asserts that this method would be too extreme to terminate nutrias, as this will severely affect farming in highlands. The drainage carries water for farming, and drying them up will inhibit the proper growth of the crops. Thus the livelihood of the people living in highlands will be negatively affected
Finally the author says that considering nutrias as a food source can turn the problem into the people's benefit. The author contends that nutrias are very nutritious, containing high amount of protien and carohydrates and less fat. But the author argues that this should be avoided as it can have severe impact on consumer health. The nutrias carry many bacterias, parasites and disease spreading pathogens. These can induce various diseases like tuloremia, tuberculosis etc. The pathogens can cause fever, drastic weight loss and other diseases in the people consuming nutrias. So adding nutrias to one's meal plan is not a good idea, at all.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 250, 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.
... very effective in serving the purpose. The lecturer disputes the level of effectiv...
^^^
Line 3, column 269, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...and walls as easily as they can chew off wooden or styrofoam walls. Also in autho...
^^
Line 5, column 132, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ge the nutrias from using these drain as a habitat or a travel route. The lecture...
^^
Line 5, column 409, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...inhibit the proper growth of the crops. Thus the livelihood of the people living in ...
^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Finally,
...ighlands will be negatively affected Finally the author says that considering nutria...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 601, Rule ID: ONES[1]
Message: Did you mean 'one's'?
Suggestion: one's
...consuming nutrias. So adding nutrias to ones meal plan is not a good idea, at all.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, look, may, second, secondly, so, still, thus, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 5.04856512141 337% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 15.0 7.30242825607 205% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1981.0 1373.03311258 144% => OK
No of words: 380.0 270.72406181 140% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.21315789474 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41515443553 4.04702891845 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60084553692 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 214.0 145.348785872 147% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.563157894737 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 595.8 419.366225166 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => 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: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 13.0662251656 168% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.170369431 49.2860985944 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.0454545455 110.228320801 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.2727272727 21.698381199 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.63636363636 7.06452816374 51% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 4.19205298013 143% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 4.45695364238 269% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0826672012942 0.272083759551 30% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0262678637375 0.0996497079465 26% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0205166035207 0.0662205650399 31% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0499393546902 0.162205337803 31% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0239824430669 0.0443174109184 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.64 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.09 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 63.6247240618 174% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.