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.
The reading claims that there are three solutions to prevent from decreasing of some frogs species that would be a serious problem .However, the lecturer finds all the idea dubious and presents some evidence to refute them all.
The author argues that by put some rules for farmer of the near of these frogs habitants to use less chemical substances, the frogs will not die anymore. Conversely, the lecturer brings up the idea that these pesticides are dangerous for frogs but it will not economic for agriculture system of that area to not use these pesticides for their crops and it damage their crop markets and will have effect on their competitions. Indeed if strict them to use these material they will loose their crops.so this solution is not efficient for this problem.
Furthermore, the reading passage holds the view that fungus have bad effects on the frog’s skin and by applying antifungal medication and heat them, the reducing of these species will disappear soon. On the contrary, the professor underlines the fact that this method is not a useful one for 2 reasons: first, spreading these drugs in large scales individually will not contribute to a positive result for this problem. second, using this solution is too expensive.
Finally, the reading asserts that by human activities and using the water of the frogs habitants is another reason for their distinction so by protecting these place and do not let people to use more water this problem will solve. In contrast, the speaker dismisses this issue due to the fact that the water shortage is not the main problem. The global warming have disappears this animals and prevent the human to use these waters unlikely change this process.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 86, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'frogs'' or 'frog's'?
Suggestion: frogs'; frog's
...ions to prevent from decreasing of some frogs species that would be a serious problem...
^^^^^
Line 1, column 131, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Don't put a space before the full stop
Suggestion: .
... species that would be a serious problem .However, the lecturer finds all the idea...
^^
Line 1, column 133, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: However
...pecies that would be a serious problem .However, the lecturer finds all the idea dubiou...
^^^^^^^
Line 2, column 356, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'damages'?
Suggestion: damages
...these pesticides for their crops and it damage their crop markets and will have effect...
^^^^^^
Line 2, column 426, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Indeed,
...will have effect on their competitions. Indeed if strict them to use these material th...
^^^^^^
Line 2, column 480, Rule ID: LOOSE_LOSE[2]
Message: Did you mean 'lose' (= miss, waste, suffer the loss etc.)?
Suggestion: lose
...ct them to use these material they will loose their crops.so this solution is not eff...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 425, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Second
... to a positive result for this problem. second, using this solution is too expensive. ...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 378, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...lem. The global warming have disappears this animals and prevent the human to use th...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, second, so, in contrast, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 37.0 22.412803532 165% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1431.0 1373.03311258 104% => OK
No of words: 288.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 4.96875 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50138609337 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 145.348785872 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.534722222222 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 438.3 419.366225166 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => 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: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 67.0305154389 49.2860985944 136% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.1 110.228320801 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.8 21.698381199 133% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.9 7.06452816374 140% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 8.0 4.19205298013 191% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.203759137719 0.272083759551 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.087485907615 0.0996497079465 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0548349596459 0.0662205650399 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.126000208716 0.162205337803 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0564100797276 0.0443174109184 127% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.4 13.3589403974 123% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 53.8541721854 96% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 11.0289183223 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.14 12.2367328918 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.97 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 10.7273730684 172% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => 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.