The reading article highlights the declination in evergreen trees called Torreya Taxifoha which are native to Florida and proposes three methods to stop the decreasing number of trees. The lecture refutes these methods and point out the loopholes in all three methods.
First, the reading proposes to reestablish the trees in its native north Florida setting. The wetter and cooler micro-climate is highly favorable to growth of these trees. However, the lecture argues that, this proposed solution is unlikely to be successful due to effects of global warming. The temperature of the surrounding areas are increasing and affecting the micro- climate. Also, the wet lands are being drained and the areas are getting drier. The trees will not survive in these adverse conditions.
Secondly, the passage suggests assisted migration. Moving Torreya seeds and saplings to different location to the north, which has cooler temperature. The lecture dismisses this solution and states the adverse effects of human interference. The professor gives a reference of Black Locas trees. Black Locas trees were moved to the North during assisted migration and spread quickly and wiped out the native endangered trees. Moreover, the professor says it is difficult to predict the outcome of assisted migration.
Lastly, the reading passage argues that, moving the Torreya trees present in the wild to a research center will give an excellent opportunity to preserve those trees and conduct a research helpful for continued survival of this species. The lecture refuses the claim and points out that, in the wild trees have diversity and face different environmental challenges and develop resistance to those challenges. But, the tree population at research center will not be strong and unable to defend to diseases. Research centers cannot provide population diversity.
In conclusion, the lecture refutes the methods presented in the reading and states that none of the methods provide satisfactory solution to the problem.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, lastly, moreover, second, secondly, so, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 7.30242825607 205% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 6.0 12.0772626932 50% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.01324503311 259% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1714.0 1373.03311258 125% => OK
No of words: 312.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.49358974359 5.08290768461 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20279927342 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69538895718 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 145.348785872 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.512820512821 0.540411800872 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 521.1 419.366225166 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 16.0 8.23620309051 194% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 48.7529244808 49.2860985944 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.2105263158 110.228320801 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.4210526316 21.698381199 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.42105263158 7.06452816374 63% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => 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: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.254956963353 0.272083759551 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0720367704639 0.0996497079465 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0786183404562 0.0662205650399 119% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.122111293267 0.162205337803 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0600369712568 0.0443174109184 135% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.27 12.2367328918 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.19 8.42419426049 109% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 63.6247240618 148% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.