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 reading paddage and the lecture talk about how to halt the frogs' extinction or their population decline. The author give three solution in order to preserve frog's population. The lecturer casts doubt on them and believes that none of them is practical.
First, the writer asserts that frogs are being harm by pesticides, used in farms to protect crops from insects damaging. In continue, due to protecting frogs life, the author mention that these chemical material should be ban to exert. On the other hand, the profosser believes that this solution is not economically. She says that its not fair for farmers who live in the farm habitat to don't use pesticides because they can't compete with other farmers.
Second, the reading proposes that some special treatment should exert to kill the fungus because fungus is a harmful creator for frogs. In regard this, the author says that this treatment should be applied in large scale. But, the lecturer mentions some difficulties in this solution. She thinks that its very complicated and expensive to apply the treatment to all indiviual frog. Besides, this treatment should be applied in each new generation of frogs.
Finally, the writer declares that lakes and marshes should be protected from hamuns activities like excessive water use, because they will damage by the human activity. But, the professor believes that lakes and marshes are damaged by global warming and by controling humans activities will not serve the purpose of protecting frogs inhabitat.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 69, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'frogs'' or 'frog's'?
Suggestion: frogs'; frog's
... the lecture talk about how to halt the frogs extinction or their population decline....
Line 1, column 126, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'gives'.
...or their population decline. The author give three solution in order to preserve fro...
Line 3, column 223, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO
Message: Did you mean 'banned'?
... that these chemical material should be ban to exert. On the other hand, the profos...
Line 3, column 390, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
...farmers who live in the farm habitat to dont use pesticides because they cant compet...
Line 3, column 423, Rule ID: CANT
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...tat to dont use pesticides because they cant compete with other farmers. Second, ...
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, but, finally, first, if, second, so, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 5.01324503311 239% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1282.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 248.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.16935483871 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96837696647 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.48574238257 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 145.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.584677419355 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 384.3 419.366225166 92% => 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: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.6672226538 49.2860985944 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.5714285714 110.228320801 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.7142857143 21.698381199 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.5 7.06452816374 64% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.106708886944 0.272083759551 39% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0375884347332 0.0996497079465 38% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0422741278404 0.0662205650399 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0671982169254 0.162205337803 41% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0405207359737 0.0443174109184 91% => OK
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.3589403974 88% => 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: 12.41 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
Rates: 65.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 19.5 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.