TPO-15 - Integrated Writing Task
The cane toad is a large (1.8 kg) amphibian species native to Central and South America. It was deliberately introduced to Australia in 1935 with the expectation that it would protect farmers' crops by eating harmful insects. Unfortunately, the toad multiplied rapidly, and a large cane toad population now threatens small native animals that are not pests. Several measures have been proposed to stop the spread of the cane toad in Australia.
One way to prevent the spread of the toad would be to build affected fence. A fence that blocks the advance of the toads will prevent them from moving into those parts of Australia that they have not yet colonized. This approach has been used before: a national fence was erected in the early part of the twentieth century to prevent the spread of rabbits, another animal species that was introduced in Australia from abroad and had a harmful impact on its native ecosystems.
Second, the toads could be captured and destroyed by volunteers. Cane toads can easily be caught in simple traps and can even stop by hand. Young toads and cane toad eggs are even easier to gather and destroy,since they , to the water. If the Australian government were to organize a campaign among Australian citizens to join forces to the the toads, the collective effort might stop the toad from spreading.
Third, researchers are developing a disease-causing virus to control the cane toad populations. This virus will be specially designed: although it will be able to infect a number of reptile and amphibian species, it will not harm most of the infected species; it will specifically harm only the cane toads. The virus will control the population of cane toads by preventing them from maturing and reproducing.
The author proposed three ways to prevent the growing population of the cane toad. Earlier, cane toad was introduced to Australia introduced from America to help the farmers but their growing population is a threat to the other species, so their population needs to stop. In the lecture, speaker oppose the ideas and said the ideas were not convincing.
First method that the author gave, build a national fence that blocks the frogs from moving to those parts that they have not colonized yet. The author hopes this will be a great idea because this method adapted before to prevent the population of rabbits. But the speaker opposes this idea by saying, Cane toad usually lay their eggs in streams like rive, and the streams carry the eggs to the upper side. So, there will be a trivial chance that the eggs of the toads will be captured by the fence.
Another option the author proposed that the cane toads can be captured easily even by the hands. So, if a large group of volunteers captured the toads and destroy their eggs the population of the toad will be within the limit. But, the speaker counters the point by saying, though a large group of people can help to destroy eggs and could kill the toads, there is myriad chance that a group of untrained people can actually destroy endangered species of frogs.
The last option the author provides spread a virus among cane toad. Though the virus can harm other amphibian and reptiles but that would be negligible. The virus acutely harms cane toad. The speaker against the idea because, even though the virus harm cane toad but that also harm the international ecosystem. As, many species of reptiles from Australia transport to America and as the virus also affected the reptiles, if the affected animal transport to the America that virus harm indigent animals and reptiles of America. As the cane toads are originated from America, that virus could destroy the local population of the cane toad, and that would be an economic disaster.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 679, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...and that would be an economic disaster.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, if, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 5.04856512141 238% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1661.0 1373.03311258 121% => OK
No of words: 346.0 270.72406181 128% => OK
Chars per words: 4.80057803468 5.08290768461 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.31289638616 4.04702891845 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.26374389073 2.5805825403 88% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 145.348785872 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.42774566474 0.540411800872 79% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 509.4 419.366225166 121% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 1.25165562914 479% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.7955594132 49.2860985944 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 103.8125 110.228320801 94% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.625 21.698381199 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.125 7.06452816374 30% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => 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: 0.579487866409 0.272083759551 213% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.218900317465 0.0996497079465 220% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.112911605114 0.0662205650399 171% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.343150863018 0.162205337803 212% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0623582868783 0.0443174109184 141% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.3589403974 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.56 12.2367328918 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.19 8.42419426049 85% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 63.6247240618 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.