Both the lecture and reading article talks about decreasing population of yellow cedar trees. While the passage talks about the possible theories to explain the reasons behind the decreasing number of yellow cedar trees, the lecture refuses the theories, citing the lack of evidence to prove those true.
First, the reading claims, the insect parasite- cedar bark beetle is contributing towards the decline. There are known instances where beetle larvae eats wood and eventually the tree dies. However, the lecture argues that, healthy yellow cedar trees are resistant to insects' attack. Bark of the tree is saturated with the chemical which is poisonous to beetles. Beetle attack can damage trees which are already dying but not the main cause for deceasing yellow cedar population.
Also, the passage makes an argument that brown bears claw the trees. Bark of the yellow cedar is high in sugar content, in fact its' sugar content is as equal as wild berries and bears like to eat the bark. The lecture counters this theory by pointing out, in Northwest America the yellow cedar population is decreasing at same rate for both island and inland. The theory failed explain the decreasing number of cedars on island as there are no bears on islands.
Lastly, the reading article states that, climate change has an adverse effect on root system of the trees. Fine roots growing in late winter are sensitive to cold temperature and frost damage is responsible to growth of the trees. The lecture refutes this claim by stating, more trees die at lower elevation where temperature is warm than higher elevation. Moreover, the professor says, roots can become sensitive to the frost but that's not responsible for killing these trees.
In conclusion, the lecture disagrees with the reading passage and dismisses the claims made in the passage due to enough explanation to prove those claims true.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 432, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: that's
...s can become sensitive to the frost but thats not responsible for killing these trees...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, lastly, moreover, so, while, in conclusion, in fact
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 9.0 22.412803532 40% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1591.0 1373.03311258 116% => OK
No of words: 311.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.11575562701 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.19942759058 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.34963101663 2.5805825403 91% => OK
Unique words: 165.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.530546623794 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 483.3 419.366225166 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => 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: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.2591228726 49.2860985944 70% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.4375 110.228320801 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4375 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.875 7.06452816374 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.379009526161 0.272083759551 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.128826404332 0.0996497079465 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0595966143814 0.0662205650399 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.183289971354 0.162205337803 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.110492604389 0.0443174109184 249% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.42 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.98 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 63.6247240618 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => 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.