The reading article presents three advantages of genetically modified trees. The lecture refutes those advantages by stating the adverse effects associated with genetically modified trees.
First, the reading proposes that, genetically modified trees are resistant to the adverse weather conditions than natural trees. Author uses new Hawaiian pest-resistant Papaya trees example to support the claim. However, the lecture counters the theory and points out that, genetically modified trees may be resistant to one particular condition but will not be able to survive other climatic challenges. At least, few natural trees will survive the poor climate, or pest attack and continue the species existence. But, same cannot be held true for modified trees as the genetic composition is uniform and exposure to environmental challenge can wipe out entire species.
In addition, the passage put forth economic benefits of planting genetically modified tress that grow fast, yield more and reduces the amount of pesticide required; providing great return on investment for farmers. The lecture dismisses the benefit and states that, there are more hidden cost involved in planting genetically modified trees. By law farmers need to pay the tree company every time they plant the seeds even if they use the seeds from the previously planted trees.
Lastly, the reading argues that, fast growing genetically modified trees can be used to prevent over exploitation of wild trees for firewood or building timber and can save rare native species of trees from extinction. But, the lecture refutes the claim and points out that, usually the modified trees grow aggressively and out compete native species in using natural resources. Moreover, the professor adds, genetically modified trees will crowd out the native and rare species.
In conclusion, the lecture refuses all the three claims presented in the reading article and states that even though there can be some benefits involved using genetically modified trees but, the serious problems and costs associated outweighs those benefits.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, lastly, may, moreover, so, at least, in addition, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 7.30242825607 205% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 11.0 22.412803532 49% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1778.0 1373.03311258 129% => OK
No of words: 319.0 270.72406181 118% => OK
Chars per words: 5.5736677116 5.08290768461 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22617688928 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61155808861 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 145.348785872 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.542319749216 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 546.3 419.366225166 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.913338853 49.2860985944 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 127.0 110.228320801 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.7857142857 21.698381199 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.28571428571 7.06452816374 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.534948829179 0.272083759551 197% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.213446321573 0.0996497079465 214% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0783066360366 0.0662205650399 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.311119320465 0.162205337803 192% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0850376514354 0.0443174109184 192% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.3589403974 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 53.8541721854 76% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.0289183223 119% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.32 12.2367328918 125% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.79 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 63.6247240618 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.