The lecturer and the reading passage discussing about decline yellow cedar population in northwestern North America. The article presents three hypothesis regarding decrease the population of the yellow cedar. However, the lecturer says that unfortunately, still no evidence find behind the decline cedar population and refutes each assumption of the article.
Firstly, the reading passage emphasizes that insect parasites mainly the cedar bark beetle responsible for decline yellow cedar population. The lecturer, in contrast, mentions that healthy yellow cedar well resistant to cedar bark beetle and all insect. Leave and bark of the yellow cedar saturate with chemical which is poisonous for cedar bark beetle, when beetle attack on the leave and bark cedar, eventually secretion of chemical and beetle die out.
Secondly, the article posits that aggressive feeding of yellow cedar by bears caused diminish the yellow cedar population. The lecture, on contrary, explains that it is true that some trees damaged by beer but it is not main caused for decline yellow cedar because of decline population not in single region where beer lived but it is whole northwestern America including mainland and island. Beer lived in mainland but not in island still, yellow cedar population decline in island. So beer is not responsible for decline cedar population.
Third, the article implies that seasonal changes and freezing cold climate damage the root of yellow cedar. On the other hand, the lecturer opposes this point and implies that according to the record trees more die in lower elevation in the warmer climate than higher elevation in cold climate. So, article assumption is invalid that which is states that freezing harms to the root and eventually kill yellow cedar.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 145, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'hypothesis' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'hypotheses', 'hypothesises'.
Suggestion: hypotheses; hypothesises
...rth America. The article presents three hypothesis regarding decrease the population of th...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, regarding, second, secondly, so, still, third, well, in contrast, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 7.30242825607 178% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 22.412803532 62% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 5.01324503311 279% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1501.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 279.0 270.72406181 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.37992831541 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08696624509 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5269706891 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 132.0 145.348785872 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.47311827957 0.540411800872 88% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 468.9 419.366225166 112% => 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
Interrogative: 1.0 0.116997792494 855% => Less interrogative sentences wanted.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.4435498236 49.2860985944 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.461538462 110.228320801 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4615384615 21.698381199 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.61538461538 7.06452816374 136% => 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 : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => 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: 0.399682316651 0.272083759551 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.173619213385 0.0996497079465 174% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0531560641997 0.0662205650399 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.245230864917 0.162205337803 151% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0353994615063 0.0443174109184 80% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.3589403974 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 53.8541721854 77% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.92 12.2367328918 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.53 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 68.0 63.6247240618 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.