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.
Both the reading and lecture discuss whether human growth, proliferate in agriculture and toxic pesticides and insecticides are main reason of decline in birds demographic in United states. The former argue that man population steady growth, agriculture development and pesticides appliance will be even more mounting in future which will obviously decline in number of birds, and provide three possible reasons to support, but latter challenges each of these points.
First of all, the author of the passage asserts that unless human population extension continue, old natural habitat will even dramatically declining in future which definitely diminish in the number of birds in future. However, the professor in the lecture contends that it does not hold true. because urban development has justify as large habitat sites for many different birds such as pigeon and so forth expect few birds. There has been complain in state about increasing in the rate of birds in United States.
Secondly, according to the passage, the expert opined that agriculture development has been lead to gigantic population of human which eradicate pace of birds and will be even more decline in near future. In contrast, the lecture objects this idea because agriculture land of United States which has been only exploited in smaller portion. She supports her argument by presenting the example of high technologies that introduce various variety of crops and produces large amount in even tiny area of land.
Finally, the passage claims that due massive use of chemical pesticides, it kill birds or might prevent in reproducing rate of birds. Nevertheless, two suggestions before, the professor in her lecture proclaims that this recommendation is not feasible because famers are now aware about the consequences of traditional toxic pesticides. Thus, scientist has developed new toxin resistant bio-pesticides as well as genetic pest resistance variety which obviously prevent birds to decline in future.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 210, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
...initely diminish in the number of birds in future. However, the professor in the lecture ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 296, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Because
...re contends that it does not hold true. because urban development has justify as large ...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 326, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'justified'.
Suggestion: justified
...old true. because urban development has justify as large habitat sites for many differe...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 361, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
... has justify as large habitat sites for many different birds such as pigeon and so forth expec...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 443, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'complained'.
Suggestion: complained
... forth expect few birds. There has been complain in state about increasing in the rate o...
^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 77, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'kills'?
Suggestion: kills
... massive use of chemical pesticides, it kill birds or might prevent in reproducing r...
^^^^
Line 7, column 487, Rule ID: IN_PAST[1]
Message: Did you mean: 'in the future'?
Suggestion: in the future
...hich obviously prevent birds to decline in future.
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, thus, well, in contrast, such as, as well as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 30.3222958057 145% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1712.0 1373.03311258 125% => OK
No of words: 309.0 270.72406181 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.54045307443 5.08290768461 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1926597562 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81107037469 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.572815533981 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 540.0 419.366225166 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => 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: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.0082695803 49.2860985944 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 142.666666667 110.228320801 129% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.75 21.698381199 119% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.6666666667 7.06452816374 151% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
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: 0.214184012931 0.272083759551 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0799476961815 0.0996497079465 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.059627126448 0.0662205650399 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.132005289147 0.162205337803 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0437961342256 0.0443174109184 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 13.3589403974 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.64 53.8541721854 70% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.0289183223 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.15 12.2367328918 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.53 8.42419426049 113% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 63.6247240618 143% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 21.0 10.7273730684 196% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.