Tamarisk beetle
The reading passage claims that the use of tamarisk beetle for eradication of the tamarisk tree has some disadvantages. However, the lecturer refutes this assertion with following reasons.
First of all, while the authors mentions that the uncontrollable spread of the insect would be serious ecological threat, the lecture argues that the spread of the tamarisk beetle can be controlled. Specifically, since the tamarisk tree is the only food source of the insect, its dispersion would not be uncontrollable. Furthermore, according to the speaker, the tamarisk beetle has many predators, and this also restricts the spread of the insect. For these reasons, the speaker casts doubt on the author’s claim.
Secondly, the speaker disagrees with the author’s rationale that the release of tamarisk beetles takes a long time to kill a tamarisk tree. The lecture claims that although it takes three to five years for the tree’s death, its water consumption would decrease immediately. To be specific, the release of insects might strongly hinder the photosynthesis of the tree, which uses a lot of water. Upon this basis, the lecturer refutes the author’s assertion.
Finally, the speaker also debunks the author’s point that the risk of wildfires would rise due to the release of the insect. The lecturer argues that because of the amount of leaves, wildfire would be extinguished in soon. For this reason, the speaker disagrees with the reading passage’s idea.
In conclusion, while the author claims that the use of the tamarisk beetle on removing the tamarisk tree is disadvantageous because of several reasons, the speaker refutes the author’s claim.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, second, secondly, so, while, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 1.0 7.30242825607 14% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1416.0 1373.03311258 103% => OK
No of words: 263.0 270.72406181 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.38403041825 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02706775958 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88091008253 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 127.0 145.348785872 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.48288973384 0.540411800872 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 413.1 419.366225166 99% => 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: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.0602469251 49.2860985944 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.142857143 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.7857142857 21.698381199 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.42857142857 7.06452816374 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.315420483297 0.272083759551 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.127921080137 0.0996497079465 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.164480342335 0.0662205650399 248% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.226766176965 0.162205337803 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.125766970233 0.0443174109184 284% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.2367328918 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.25 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 63.6247240618 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => 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.