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, wetland, and grasslands will give way to ever more home, 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 inhabitants 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. Pesticide 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 and the lecture argues that whether or not the increase in human and agricultural activity using pesticide leads to the reduction in birds population.
First of all, the author claims that due to the increase in human population which are continuing, the bird's habitat is equally diminishing. This is due to the encroachment of wide areas by humans for constructing homes and malls. The lecture refutes this statement by says that cities are getting bigger and better which actually increasing the seagull and pigeons also to habituate more. The fox is also increasing to hunt on seagulls and pigeons. In fact, this shrinks the pigeon number to a small extent but not all.
Secondly, the writer contends that when human population increase the agriculture activities also need to be increased in order to supply for populations. This growth of agriculture further reduces the bird's inhabitants in the rural area. However, the speaker posits that in the United States the agriculture land is less due to advancement in the crop culture. The professor further points out that due to the technical advancement in agriculture the production of the crop is increasing significantly even with less land.
Finally, the article mentions that the use of chemical pesticides for agriculture is increasing, which is poisonously designed to kill the pests, insects eventually disturbing the food chain for birds. In contrast, the professor rebuts this claim by stating that people are using pesticides in two different ways which are not harmful to pests. First, a new pesticide which is harmless and the second one is resistance-free pesticide which is genetically designed to resists pests which really don't harm birds at all.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 41, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...The reading and the lecture argues that whether or not the increase in human and agricultural ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 104, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'birds'' or 'bird's'?
Suggestion: birds'; bird's
...an population which are continuing, the birds habitat is equally diminishing. This is...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 468, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'resist'.
Suggestion: resist
...ticide which is genetically designed to resists pests which really dont harm birds at a...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 495, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
... designed to resists pests which really dont harm birds at all.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, first, however, if, really, second, secondly, so, in contrast, in fact, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1459.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 279.0 270.72406181 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.229390681 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08696624509 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88259406504 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.537634408602 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 446.4 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.0149311301 49.2860985944 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.230769231 110.228320801 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4615384615 21.698381199 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.76923076923 7.06452816374 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More 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: 0.257153388016 0.272083759551 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0921812330077 0.0996497079465 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0531148987831 0.0662205650399 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.158886535126 0.162205337803 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0368641219359 0.0443174109184 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.3589403974 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.05 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.7 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.