The passage and the lecture are both about the decrease of number of birds. The reading gives three reasons for that possible declination in the number of birds, however, the speaker says that all these reasons are not convincing and provides counter explanations as follows.
First, the reading claims the growing activity of home building destroy the natural habitats of the birds which in turn leads to the decrease in number of birds. The lecturer, on the other hand, refutes this supposition by stating that the new urban area, in fact, provide more diverse habitat and new possible food like for birds. That can be seen in cities where seagulls , hooks and other birds feed on rodents or rats.
Second, the text says that the expanding in agriculture is another factor that eradicates more birds habitats. The professor, in contrast, rebuts this claim by explaining that now new crops are being cultivated that yields more and variety of crops that provide birds with new food. As a result of using these modern techniques in agriculture, there is no need for destroying more lands.
Third, the author of the reading contends that the using of pesticides in agriculture has serious effects on birds which could cause the declination of birds or even killing them. The speaker goes against this claim and she elaborates that now there a trend of using less toxic pesticides that unlikely to hurt birds. Moreover, The companies are providing more pests-resistant crops which will decrease the need of using pesticides and forever. As a result, the pesticides will not impose any serious danger on the birds on the near future.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 373, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...hat can be seen in cities where seagulls , hooks and other birds feed on rodents o...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, moreover, second, so, third, in contrast, in fact, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1360.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 273.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98168498168 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06481385082 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52365863296 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.527472527473 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 410.4 419.366225166 98% => 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
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.7886008456 49.2860985944 79% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.333333333 110.228320801 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.75 21.698381199 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.5 7.06452816374 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.373260883128 0.272083759551 137% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.134826765162 0.0996497079465 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0806796895033 0.0662205650399 122% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.20441791511 0.162205337803 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.110643779007 0.0443174109184 250% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.9 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.26 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.