Throughout the world's oceans, hard structures such as natural reefs provide ideal marine habitats Artificial reefs have several benefits.
Reefs provide hard surfaces to which plants, coral and sponges can attach: and thereby provide food and shelter for many types of fish.Recently, workers in the fishing industry have tried to increase the amount of suitable habitat for fish by constructing artificial reefs from old metal objects and industrial materials and placing them in coastal waters .
Artificial reefs can also improve the economic competitiveness of small-scale fishers. This is possible because small-scale fishers are able to create their own private artificial reefs in secret locations only they know. Currently, small-scale fishers struggle to compete with larger corporations because fishing grounds are limited in number and most are known to everyone. Creating fishing areas known only to the fishers who make them will help independent fishers support themselves and their local communities.
Finally, artificial reefs are a good way to recycle materials no longer needed for other purposes. Artificial reefs can be made from old cars and other objects that are otherwise difficult to dispose of. Once these materials have been cleaned to ensure that no harmful chemicals remain, they can be placed in the ocean to serve as reefs for marine life Artificial reefs thus provide a relatively inexpensive, environmentally friendly way to reuse materials.
The article introduces the topic of the benefits of innovating artificial coral reefs. More specifically, the writer discusses its positive effects on the environment. The lecturer in the listening passage, however, disagrees. He believes that it will cause more problems than by having good results.
In the reading, the author begins by stating that coral reefs provide food and shelter for many marine animals. So, by creating artificial reefs from old industrial objects, fishers can increase the habitat of fish. The lecturer, however, disagrees with this viewpoint. He states that plenty of fish caught near coral reefs does not mean that the entire population of fish has increased. He does on to say that reefs attract fish from distant locations. If a new coral reef will be constructed, it will result in decreasing fish population.
The author also claims that, for small fish industries to increase competitiveness, they can build a coral reef site, only that they are aware of. Again, the lecturer believes there are flaws in the writer's argument. The speaker holds that building these sites will harm the environment. He adds that if the coral reef is on the lower part of the ocean, boats will be likely to crush it.
Another reason why the author feels recycling materials can be made by building coral reefs from old cars and other materials that are not recyclable is that it will create a more ecological way. The professor in the listening passage is doubtful that this is accurate. He suggests that by explaining about a coral reef, that was destroyed because the car materials it was made, harmed many plants and animals. To sum up, both the writer and professor hold conflicting views about artificial coral reef advantages.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 200, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...ecturer believes there are flaws in the writers argument. The speaker holds that buildi...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, so, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1463.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 290.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04482758621 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65675053863 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 145.348785872 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551724137931 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 443.7 419.366225166 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => 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: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.1053529034 49.2860985944 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 81.2777777778 110.228320801 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.1111111111 21.698381199 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.77777777778 7.06452816374 25% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => 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: 0.255667477886 0.272083759551 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0763580374355 0.0996497079465 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0808829181913 0.0662205650399 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.142368048178 0.162205337803 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0713000556583 0.0443174109184 161% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.4 13.3589403974 78% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 53.8541721854 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 12.2367328918 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.35 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.