In recent years, many frog species around the world have declined in numbers or even gone extinct due to changes in their environment. These population declines and extinctions have serious consequences for the ecosystems in which frogs live; for example, frogs help play a role in protecting humans by eating disease-carrying insects. Several methods have been proposed to solve the problem of declining frog populations.
First, frogs are being harmed by pesticides, which are chemicals used to prevent insects from damaging farm crops such as corn and sugarcane. Pesticides often spread from farmland into neighboring frog habitats. Once pesticides enter a frog’s body, they attack the nervous system, leading to severe breathing problems. If laws prohibited the farmers from using harmful pesticides near sensitive frog populations, it would significantly reduce the harm pesticides cause to frogs.
A second major factor in frog population decline is a fungus that has spread around the world with deadly effect. The fungus causes thickening of the skin, and since frogs use their skin to absorb water, infected frogs die of dehydration. Recently, researchers have discovered several ways to treat or prevent infection, including antifungal medication and treatments that kill the fungus with heat. Those treatments, if applied on a large scale, would protect sensitive frog populations from infection.
Third, in a great many cases, frog populations are in decline simply because their natural habitats are threatened. Since most frog species lay their eggs in water, they are dependent on water and wetland habitats. Many such habitats are threatened by human activities, including excessive water use or the draining of wetlands to make them suitable for development. If key water habitats such as lakes and marshes were better protected from excessive water use and development, many frog species would recover.
Both the passage and the lecturer discuss the declination of frog populations. The passage provides three solutions to slow down the decrease of frog populations. However, the lecturer disagrees with those statements.
First of all, the writer mentions that the pesticides used in the farm near the habitats of frogs will cause vital effect on frogs. Thus, the government should prohibit the farmers from using pesticides near frog populations. Still, this is very different from the lecturer's claim that this solution is not economical. If the government disallowed farmers in that area to use pesticides, their crop might be harmful by insects and the yield will decline. In this case, those farmers have more disadventage when they compete with other farmers who can use the pesticides.
Secondly, although the writer states that a fungus which spread around the world causes the frogs dehydrate and die, there are several ways to treat this disease of frogs, the lecturer rebuts this belief by point out that this treatment could just treat one frog at a time. Therefore, reasearchers should do this treatment again and again. Moreover, the effect of the treatment could not be passed down to frog's offsprings. Thus, the new generations of frog also should have be treated, which might cause enormous of money.
Third, the author also asserts that the declination of frog is cause by human activities, such as using excessive water or draining of wetlands. So we should protect the water habitats to slow down the decrease of frog. Nevertheless, the lecturer refutes this claim. Protecting the water habitats can not save frogs because the loss of the water resources is caused by global warming. In this case, using less water or protect certain water habitats will not change anything about the recovery of frog species.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 407, Rule ID: TO_NON_BASE[1]
Message: The verb after "to" should be in the base form: 'frog'.
Suggestion: frog
...e treatment could not be passed down to frogs offsprings. Thus, the new generations o...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 476, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'been'.
Suggestion: been
...ew generations of frog also should have be treated, which might cause enormous of ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, still, therefore, third, thus, such 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: 13.0 5.04856512141 257% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 30.3222958057 132% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1539.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 299.0 270.72406181 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14715719064 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58047075542 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.531772575251 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 454.5 419.366225166 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 50.0737863861 49.2860985944 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.5294117647 110.228320801 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5882352941 21.698381199 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.58823529412 7.06452816374 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.13985573181 0.272083759551 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0493775526205 0.0996497079465 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0389225039998 0.0662205650399 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0886066544517 0.162205337803 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0225596876985 0.0443174109184 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 13.3589403974 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 53.8541721854 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.29 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.