The passage proposes three reasons why the frog has been extinct from the ecosystem and has also offer solutions to each problems. Unfortunately, all of the statements are contradicted by the lecturer.
First, the lecture argues that reducing the use of pesticides is not economical to farmers. According to the passage uses of pesticides cause to severe decrease in the numbers of frog so the law should be applied in order to restrict the use of pesticides. However, the lecturer points out that omitting the use of pesticides hamper the business of farmers as it decreases the yield of crops compared to the other farmers who use the pesticides for the betterment of the crops.
Furthermore, the speaker asserts that it is difficult to sort out the problem in every individual frog cause by fungus. Though the passage contends that fungus affect on the skin of frogs which cause dehydration and lowers the populations of frogs. So, anti-fugal medications to frogs reduces the fungus susceptibility to them which helps to prevent the declining rates of crops. The lecture holds that the use of medication to large case is difficult and also expensive as these medication should be carried out to all species of frog with specific example that these medications will not transfer to their offspring.
Moreover, the lecturer claims that diminish rate of frogs are results of increasing in global warming. It is reported in the passage that natural habitat of frogs are threatened through human activities. On the contrary, the lecture quotes a view of an expert and believes that disappearance of frog and other species are due to the global warming which are unlike to decrease with the stoppage of human activities.
In short, using specific examples and reasons, the lecturer refutes all the statements presented in the passage and suggests that the suggestions provided in the passage is not practical solutions.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 98, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'offered'.
Suggestion: offered
...extinct from the ecosystem and has also offer solutions to each problems. Unfortunate...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 147, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...utions to each problems. Unfortunately, all of the statements are contradicted by the lect...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 161, Rule ID: AFFECT_EFFECT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'effect'?
Suggestion: effect
...Though the passage contends that fungus affect on the skin of frogs which cause dehydrati...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 475, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this medication' or 'these medications'?
Suggestion: this medication; these medications
...case is difficult and also expensive as these medication should be carried out to all species o...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 501, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... expensive as these medication should be carried out to all species of frog with ...
^^
Line 7, column 278, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...es a view of an expert and believes that disappearance of frog and other species ...
^^
Line 9, column 199, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...the passage is not practical solutions.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, however, if, moreover, so, in short, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 30.3222958057 178% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1614.0 1373.03311258 118% => OK
No of words: 315.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.12380952381 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81792484433 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.495238095238 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 505.8 419.366225166 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => 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: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.4937866146 49.2860985944 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.153846154 110.228320801 113% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2307692308 21.698381199 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.0 7.06452816374 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.165966877006 0.272083759551 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0577212211419 0.0996497079465 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0401673680175 0.0662205650399 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0803361768367 0.162205337803 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0524531468709 0.0443174109184 118% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 13.3589403974 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 12.2367328918 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.34 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 63.6247240618 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.