Based on the reading material, it is stated that there are 3 viable hypotheses for scientists to explain why the populations of the yellow cedar, a species of tree in northwestern North America have been declining. However, the lecturer finds this idea bereft of sufficient reasoning and presents some ideas to the contrary.
Initially, the author argued that the populations of yellow cedar decline, due to insect infestations. The cedar bark beetle attacks the trees and eat the wood. That being said, the lecturer repudiated this idea by clarifying that healthy cedar tress have much more resistance against insects parasites by producing a chemical substance. Thus, if there is a yellow cedar attacked by insects, it means that the tree is already damaged or dead.
Another point mentioned by the author was that brown bears, by clawing at the cedars and eating their barks, will make the trees weak enough to be damaged. However, the lecturer rejected this one too by stating that the populations of yellow cedar have been declining all across the North America, including in lands and islands. Since there are no bears living in islands, they cannot be the reason for the tree's decline.
The final point advanced in the reading passage was that the populations of cedar trees decrease owing to the fact that, changes of climate have affected the root systems of the trees. Yet again, the lecturer casted doubt on this idea. He said that as the reading pointed out, cedars are expected to die at high-elevation regions, which the weather is very cold, whereas cedars are wiped out more at lower-elevation regions, which the weather is more warmer. Thus, the changing in patterns of climate is not the reason for tree's decline.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 446, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'warmer' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: warmer
...elevation regions, which the weather is more warmer. Thus, the changing in patterns of clim...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, so, thus, whereas, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1445.0 1373.03311258 105% => OK
No of words: 290.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 4.98275862069 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55193149204 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.558620689655 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 439.2 419.366225166 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.9890099106 49.2860985944 114% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.153846154 110.228320801 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.3076923077 21.698381199 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.84615384615 7.06452816374 40% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
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: 0.458617549568 0.272083759551 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.170464666747 0.0996497079465 171% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0829945079581 0.0662205650399 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.281928141676 0.162205337803 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0477507924216 0.0443174109184 108% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.3589403974 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.9 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.65 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.