The lecturer raises three arguments to cast doubt on the passage's suggestions that genetically modified trees are beneficial both ecologically and economically
To begin with, the professor rules out the possibility that genetic trees are more resistant to bad conditions, instead pointing out that they lack gene diversity compared to wild type trees, and therefore are likely to die out under circumstances that they were not designed to deal with.
Secondly, contrary to the reading material that trees with genetic modifications have more economic profits, the lecturer contends they are even more expensive, citing the evidence that modified seeds always have a higher price, and farmers are supposed to pay it every time they use it, instead of collecting seeds from previous trees.
Finally, the professor asserts that genetically modified trees are actually more damaging to other wild trees, especially to rare species, for they can grow aggressively, and hence compete for nutrients and light with other trees. Unique trees are vulnerable and may be competed out by these trees. This again contrasts to the reading that genetically modified trees can protect normal trees from overexploitaion.
In conclusion, based on the arguments mentioned by the professor, genetically modified trees are not that significant as the passage suggests.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, finally, hence, if, may, second, secondly, so, therefore, in conclusion, in contrast, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalization wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1153.0 1373.03311258 84% => OK
No of words: 207.0 270.72406181 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.57004830918 5.08290768461 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.79308509922 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86722199747 2.5805825403 111% => OK
Unique words: 122.0 145.348785872 84% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.589371980676 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 361.8 419.366225166 86% => 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
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.23620309051 49% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 6.0 13.0662251656 46% => Need more sentences, or put a space between two sentences.
Sentence length: 34.0 21.2450331126 160% => OK
Sentence length SD: 134.186126953 49.2860985944 272% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 192.166666667 110.228320801 174% => OK
Words per sentence: 34.5 21.698381199 159% => OK
Discourse Markers: 18.1666666667 7.06452816374 257% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.433174793928 0.272083759551 159% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.238810082728 0.0996497079465 240% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.056192915977 0.0662205650399 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.23497962743 0.162205337803 145% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.101755984921 0.0443174109184 230% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 22.1 13.3589403974 165% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 28.51 53.8541721854 53% => It means the essay is relatively harder to read.
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 17.7 11.0289183223 160% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.62 12.2367328918 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.82 8.42419426049 117% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 30.0 10.7273730684 280% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 15.6 10.498013245 149% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.2008830022 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.