The article states that there are several methods to solve the problem of declining frog populations and provides three reasons of support. The professor, nevertheless, explains that the method brought by the author are not practical solutions and there are some problems with them.
First, the reading states that prohibiting farmers from using harmful pesticides near sensitive frog populations would considerably reduce the harm pesticides cause to frogs. The Professor, however, refutes this point by saying that this author method is not economically practical. He states that prohibiting farmers from using pesticides is strict law for farmers. Besides that, this restriction will cause low yield.
Furthermore, the author claims that there are some new discoveries such as antifungal medication and heating them would help frog populations from infection by fungus. The lecture, on the other hand, says that there are two problems with this author's idea. The first one is that it is difficult to capture each individual frog and apply those discoveries to kill the captured frogs. Also, this antifungal treatment will not prevent passing the mentioned diseases by author. The disease will spread then again and again. Therefore the second method proposed by the author is complicated and expensive.
Finally, the reading claims that if water habitats of frogs such as lakes and marshes were better protected from excessive water use and development, many frog species would recover. The professor again refutes this method by saying that this method would not save frog population. The biggest reason that threaten the natural habitat of frogs is global warming not what the author mentions. The professor also mentions that this reason threatend many land and habitat. Therefore, the last method of the author is again impractable.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 244, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...s that there are two problems with this authors idea. The first one is that it is diffi...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 521, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...sease will spread then again and again. Therefore the second method proposed by the autho...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 393, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...l warming not what the author mentions. The professor also mentions that this reaso...
^^^
Line 7, column 448, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[2]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun land seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much land', 'a good deal of land'.
Suggestion: much land; a good deal of land
...lso mentions that this reason threatend many land and habitat. Therefore, the last method...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, nevertheless, second, so, then, therefore, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1565.0 1373.03311258 114% => OK
No of words: 286.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.47202797203 5.08290768461 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11236361783 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62172719206 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 145.348785872 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.538461538462 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 467.1 419.366225166 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 13.0662251656 130% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.6715257936 49.2860985944 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.0588235294 110.228320801 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.8235294118 21.698381199 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.41176470588 7.06452816374 105% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.379474608041 0.272083759551 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.118160823005 0.0996497079465 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.129937950026 0.0662205650399 196% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.232866219729 0.162205337803 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0676626547173 0.0443174109184 153% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.7 13.3589403974 95% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.15 12.2367328918 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.01 8.42419426049 107% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 63.6247240618 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.