Populations of the yellow cedar, a species of tree that is common in northwestern North America, have been steadily declining for more than a century now, since about 1880. Scientists have advanced several hypotheses to explain this decline.
One hypothesis is that the yellow cedar decline may be caused by insect parasites, specifically the cedar bark beetle. This beetle is known to attack cedar trees; the beetle larvae eat the wood. There have been recorded instances of sustained beetle attacks overwhelming and killing yellow cedars, so this insect is a good candidate for the cause of the tree's decline.
A second hypothesis attributes the decline to brown bears. Bears sometimes claw at the cedars in order to eat the tree bark, which has a high sugar content. In fact, the cedar bark can contain as much sugar as the wild berries that are a staple of the bears' diet. Although the bears' clawing is unlikely to destroy trees by itself, their aggressive feeding habits may critically weaken enough trees to be responsible for the decline.
The third hypothesis states that gradual changes of climate may be to blame. Over the last hundred years, the patterns of seasonal as well as day-to-day temperatures have changed in northwestern North America. These changes have affected the root systems of the yellow cedar trees: the fine surface roots now start growing in the late winter rather than in the early spring. The change in the timing of root growth may have significant consequences. Growing roots are sensitive and are therefore likely to suffer damage from partial freezing on cold winter nights. This frozen root damage may be capable of undermining the health of the whole tree, eventually killing it.
The reading and the lecture are about the rapid decrease in the yellow cedar plants. More specifically, in the reading passage, the writer put forth three possible reasons for the decline. The lecturer, however, is quick to point out that those reasons are not justified enough. In fact, he believes and addresses in detail the trouble with each claim made in the reading text.
First and foremost, the author of the reading states that insect parasites are one of the main issues because bees are attacked strongly and eventually result in the extinction of cedar trees. The lecturer, however, stands in firm opposition to this claim. He states that good yellow cedar is resistant to infection. Besides, the back of the leaves and roots are toxic to insects therefore they are unlikely to experience damage.
Secondly, the writer feels that there is a decrease in brown bears because the bears contain excessive sugar just as berries that are attached to the bear diet. Again, the speaker addresses the point when he states that cedar plants are decreasing in both the northern and western parts of America therefore bears aren't seen on highlands, which means that they can not be responsible.
Finally, the author brings his argument to a close-by contending that variation in climate such as a change in timing of the root may have significant results because roots are susceptible to freeze partially. Not surprisingly, the professor rebutted this claim by contending that many trees die at low elevations than in high elevations. Even if the climate is actually responsible therefore we will have more of a cold period than a warm period.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 315, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: aren't
...estern parts of America therefore bears arent seen on highlands, which means that the...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, besides, but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1391.0 1373.03311258 101% => OK
No of words: 274.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07664233577 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0685311056 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59207604512 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.580291970803 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 424.8 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
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: 52.0578876698 49.2860985944 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.0 110.228320801 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.0769230769 21.698381199 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.23076923077 7.06452816374 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.121684060972 0.272083759551 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0412956117336 0.0996497079465 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0343992610432 0.0662205650399 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0651982823439 0.162205337803 40% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0298282930899 0.0443174109184 67% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => 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: 12.18 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 66.0 63.6247240618 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.