In this paper, the writer proposes three methods to solve the problem of the decline frog populations. On the contrary, the speaker thinks none of these methods is practical.
To begin with, according to the writer, the laws prohibited farmers from using harmful pesticides can reduce the harm pesticides cause to frogs. However, the speaker points out that it is not economical fair for farmers who live near the frogs. Because if they have to follow stricter regulations, they cannot compet with other farmers who do not live near the frogs. And they will have lose more crops and have a lower yield.
Then, as the passage says, the treat to skin infection of fungus is a useful way. But the speaker has a different view that it has many problems. Because people have to treat each frog individually which is really difficult. What's more, if they pass though the fungus again, people have to treat it again. This is expensive. With so many problems, the second way is almost useless.
In the end, the passage shows that protecting lakes and marshes from excessive water use and development is helpful. This also cannot save frogs. Because the real biggest reason is the globe warming. So this is also unlikely to save frogs by reducing water use and development.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 388, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'lost'.
Suggestion: lost
...live near the frogs. And they will have lose more crops and have a lower yield. T...
^^^^
Line 5, column 147, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Because” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...fferent view that it has many problems. Because people have to treat each frog individu...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 226, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: What's
...individually which is really difficult. Whats more, if they pass though the fungus ag...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 147, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Because” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...s helpful. This also cannot save frogs. Because the real biggest reason is the globe wa...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, really, second, so, then, on the contrary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 12.0772626932 50% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1058.0 1373.03311258 77% => OK
No of words: 218.0 270.72406181 81% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.85321100917 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.84250218741 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.40440495794 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 128.0 145.348785872 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.587155963303 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 322.2 419.366225166 77% => 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
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.25165562914 399% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 13.0 21.2450331126 61% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.2584775679 49.2860985944 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 66.125 110.228320801 60% => More chars_per_sentence wanted.
Words per sentence: 13.625 21.698381199 63% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 7.06452816374 71% => 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 : 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: 0.345855667694 0.272083759551 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0924253487328 0.0996497079465 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.073715762985 0.0662205650399 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.183296254666 0.162205337803 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.01844913919 0.0443174109184 42% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.2 13.3589403974 61% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 66.74 53.8541721854 124% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 11.0289183223 65% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.26 12.2367328918 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.61 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 46.0 63.6247240618 72% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.2 10.498013245 69% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.