In the past century, the steady growth of the human population and the corresponding increase in agriculture and pesticide use have caused much harm to wildlife in the United States—birds in particular. Unfortunately for birds, these trends are likely to continue, with the result that the number of birds in the United States will necessarily decline.
First, as human populations and settlements continue to expand, birds’ natural habitats will continue to disappear. Forests, wetlands, and grasslands will give way to ever more homes, malls, and offices. As the traditional areas suitable for birds keep decreasing, so will the size of the bird populations that depend on those vanishing habitats.
Second, agricultural activities must increase to keep pace with the growing human population. The growth of agriculture will also result in the further destruction of bird habitats as more and more wilderness areas are converted to agricultural use. As a result, bird populations in rural areas will continue to decline.
Third, as human settlements expand and agriculture increases, the use of chemical pesticides will also increase. Pesticides are poisons designed to kill agricultural and home garden pests, such as insects, but inevitably, pesticides get into the water and into the food chain for birds where they can harm birds. Birds that eat the poisoned insects or drink contaminated water can die as a result, and even if pesticides do not kill birds outright, they can prevent them from reproducing successfully. So pesticides have significantly contributed to declines in bird population, and because there will continue to be a need to control agricultural pests in the future, this decline will continue.
The reading is on rising agriculture, population and pesticide is the reason for the declining birds population in the USA. It provides three supporting ideas in order to strengthen its claim. However, the professor says the bird population will rather increase. She refutes each of the passage claim.
First, the passage states that the increase human population and settlement causes birds habitat destruction. But, the lecturer denies this and says, although this type of settlement would harm one type of bird but it will better for more groups of bird population such as, seagull, pigeon and hawk.
Second, the reading asserts that population increase causes to use more agricultural land that ultimately make vulnerable to bird survival. The professor refutes this analogy. She describes, nowadays USA has fewer land to use agricultural purpose. As the production of crops increase by applying science, so no need to use more land for crop production.
Third, the passage states that the use of pesticides rising. The point is not coherent with lecturer explanations. The professor explains, the use of pesticide is no longer harmful for birds. She provides two reasons. First, the pesticide is less toxic to cause any damage to the birds. And second, the discovery of pest resistance crops curtail to use pesticides
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 61, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'using'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'cause' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: using
...asserts that population increase causes to use more agricultural land that ultimately ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, second, so, then, third, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 12.0772626932 33% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 21.0 30.3222958057 69% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.01324503311 259% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1122.0 1373.03311258 82% => OK
No of words: 212.0 270.72406181 78% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.29245283019 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.81578560438 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76358742404 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 115.0 145.348785872 79% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.542452830189 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 347.4 419.366225166 83% => 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: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 21.2450331126 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.1597497563 49.2860985944 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 70.125 110.228320801 64% => OK
Words per sentence: 13.25 21.698381199 61% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.3125 7.06452816374 47% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.301483623425 0.272083759551 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0916676502981 0.0996497079465 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0790785226393 0.0662205650399 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.178346653149 0.162205337803 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.028498721667 0.0443174109184 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.1 13.3589403974 76% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.28 53.8541721854 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.51 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 52.0 63.6247240618 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.2 10.498013245 69% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.