The reading and lecture both discuss three possible explanation of cedar tress decline. While the reading states three hypothesis of the decrease of cedar trees, the professor refutes, saying, none of these theories are convincing.
Firstly, the article claims that cedars trees decreased because of insect parasites like beetle larvae that ate the cedar bark and killed the tree. However, the speaker argues this notion by saying that the healthy cedar trees are resistant to these insects. Moreover, he states that the bark cedar tree has poison chemical substances that could kill the larvae itself. So, the healthy cedar trees were not suffered from the damage of these insects. In addition, beetle larvae will attack the unhealthy trees that will die anyway.
In addition, the reading avers that brown bears are the reason behind the decline of cedar trees because they used to eat the bark of these trees because they have high sugar content. On the other hand, the professor question this idea by pointing out why bears caused decline in cedar trees in one area not in the whole areas. He states that they found decline in cedar trees in north United States and some islands that were free from bears. So, the bears could not be the reason behind the decline of these trees. This is because trees were declined with or without bears.
Lastly, the article mentions that the incremental changes of climate caused decline in tree because the root growth has been affected because of that. Nevertheless, the professor refutes by saying that some trees decline in high elevation because of low temperature. Also, many trees declined in lower elevation that has high temperature. So, trees were declined in both elevations. As a result, changes in climate are not the cause of cedar trees decline.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 120, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'hypothesis' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'hypotheses', 'hypothesises'.
Suggestion: hypotheses; hypothesises
...decline. While the reading states three hypothesis of the decrease of cedar trees, the pro...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, anyway, first, firstly, however, lastly, moreover, nevertheless, so, while, in addition, as a result, on the other hand
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 : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1510.0 1373.03311258 110% => OK
No of words: 300.0 270.72406181 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03333333333 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16179145029 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.24495483746 2.5805825403 87% => OK
Unique words: 140.0 145.348785872 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.466666666667 0.540411800872 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 458.1 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.5389071521 49.2860985944 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.8235294118 110.228320801 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6470588235 21.698381199 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.35294117647 7.06452816374 104% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => 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: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.405393436041 0.272083759551 149% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.151234613662 0.0996497079465 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0586867840952 0.0662205650399 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.2400170944 0.162205337803 148% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0773269959441 0.0443174109184 174% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.3589403974 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 53.8541721854 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.2367328918 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.37 8.42419426049 87% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 63.6247240618 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.