The author tells that the large cane toad population is a threat to many small native animals and it is essential to stop their spread in Australia and he suggests three ways to do it. However, the speaker does not concur with his ideas for the following reasons.
First, the author says that building national fence will prevent the migration of toads from one place to the other areas that have not been colonized. The speaker contraindicates this point and explains that the young toads and eggs reside in the rivers and are spread through it to various places. Also, small number of eggs and young toads are sufficient to establish a huge population across the river side. Therefore, confining only few adult toads will not help in solving this problem.
Second, the professor states that the untrained volunteers will destroy the valuable native toads as well as it is difficult to differentiate between the cane toad and the native toad. Moreover, the native toads are endangered species and are essential for the ecosystem. Thus, destroying toads by volunteers might harm the ecosystem instead of saving it as mentioned in the passage.
Third, the lecturer absolutely opposes the notion of reading passage to kill the cane toads by developing a virus as according to her this virus will not only affect the target species but it will indeed affect the other reptiles and amphibians as well. She further narrates that these amphibians are transported by the researchers and pet collectors to USA and thus this virus will also spread to this country resulting into the harm to the native toads which are precious for the ecosystem as discussed above. So, the lecturer refutes all three theories suggested by the passage
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 227, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...oreover, the native toads are endangered species and are essential for the ecosys...
^^^
Line 7, column 581, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... three theories suggested by the passage
^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'however', 'if', 'moreover', 'second', 'so', 'therefore', 'third', 'thus', 'well', 'as for', 'as well as']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.235483870968 0.261695866417 90% => OK
Verbs: 0.161290322581 0.158904122519 102% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0870967741935 0.0723426182421 120% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0677419354839 0.0435111971325 156% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0354838709677 0.0277247811725 128% => OK
Prepositions: 0.1 0.128828473217 78% => OK
Participles: 0.0548387096774 0.0370669169778 148% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.53178603894 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0387096774194 0.0208969081088 185% => Less infinitives wanted.
Particles: 0.0 0.00154638098197 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.132258064516 0.128158765124 103% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0225806451613 0.0158828679856 142% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00645161290323 0.0114777025283 56% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1740.0 1645.83664459 106% => OK
No of words: 290.0 271.125827815 107% => OK
Chars per words: 6.0 6.08160592843 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.04852973271 102% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.341379310345 0.374372842146 91% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.251724137931 0.287516216867 88% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.179310344828 0.187439937562 96% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.127586206897 0.113142543107 113% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53178603894 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.537931034483 0.539623497131 100% => OK
Word variations: 54.6347181445 53.8517498576 101% => OK
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0529801325 92% => OK
Sentence length: 24.1666666667 21.7502111507 111% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.1105644977 49.3711431718 126% => OK
Chars per sentence: 145.0 132.220823453 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1666666667 21.7502111507 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.16666666667 0.878197800319 133% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.39072847682 59% => OK
Readability: 49.3390804598 50.5018328374 98% => OK
Elegance: 1.4756097561 1.90840788429 77% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.751346724938 0.549887131256 137% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.138506757259 0.142949733639 97% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0898785756515 0.0787303798458 114% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.64132811319 0.631733273073 102% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.160470062989 0.139662658121 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.365741069158 0.266732575781 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.13098813516 0.103435571967 127% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.471237713539 0.414875509568 114% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0937571660421 0.0530846634433 177% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.567415355612 0.40443939384 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.042070208288 0.0528353158467 80% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.26048565121 94% => OK
Positive topic words: 3.0 3.49668874172 86% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 3.62251655629 138% => OK
Neutral topic words: 4.0 3.1766004415 126% => OK
Total topic words: 12.0 10.2958057395 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.