The reading article talks about the possible reasons that affected bird population. The lecture refutes the claims presented in the passage and states that the supporting arguments are not convincing.
First, the reading passage states that, with increase in population and expansion of human colonies; natural habitats of birds are reducing and it adversely affected population of birds. The lecture refuses the claim and points out that, the claim is not fully true, urban development is beneficial to some or the other species of birds like pigeons, seagulls and attract predatory birds like hawks with increase in population of pigeons and rodents.
In addition, the article presents an argument that, agriculture land needs increased to provide food for the growing population and that contributed towards the destruction of forests, wetlands, and grasslands. However, the lecture dismisses the theory and states that, in U.S. less land is being used for agriculture, since the introduction of new high yielding crops. It reduced the land requirements by producing more food per planted area.
Lastly, the reading concludes with the final point that, increased use of pesticide to protect crops; contaminated water and food chain and propelled decrease in number of birds by affecting reproductive system. And the effect will continue to worsen with time. But, the lecture argues that, it is an incorrect prediction of future. New less toxic pesticides are being developed, as well as new pest resistant crops will reduce the need of pesticides. Moreover, the professor ads that, these innovations will not harm birds.
In conclusion, the lecture dismisses all three possible causes that contribute towards decline in number of birds and states that there is no enough evidence to hold these claims true.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...in population of pigeons and rodents. In addition, the article presents an arg...
^^^
Line 5, column 76, Rule ID: NEEDS_FIXED[1]
Message: "needs increased" is only accepted in certain dialects. For something more widely acceptable, try 'increasing' or 'to be increased'.
Suggestion: increasing; to be increased
...n argument that, agriculture land needs increased to provide food for the growing populat...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... producing more food per planted area. Lastly, the reading concludes with the f...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, lastly, moreover, so, well, in addition, in conclusion, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 5.01324503311 239% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1540.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 284.0 270.72406181 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.42253521127 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70976728198 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 159.0 145.348785872 109% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.55985915493 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 464.4 419.366225166 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.6288650595 49.2860985944 133% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.461538462 110.228320801 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8461538462 21.698381199 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.69230769231 7.06452816374 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
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: 0.308161625909 0.272083759551 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.102133446744 0.0996497079465 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0575555681076 0.0662205650399 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.150430231813 0.162205337803 93% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0645028725634 0.0443174109184 146% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 13.3589403974 112% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.16 12.2367328918 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.46 8.42419426049 112% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 63.6247240618 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 71.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.5 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.