TPO_18
The professor in the lecture totally disagrees with the three solutions mentioned in the reading passage. In fact, she believes that these solutions won’t lead to satisfaction consequences at all.
First of all, the author suggests that the first option is to reestablish Torreya in the same location in which it thrived for a long time. Specifically, in Florida. This argument is challenged by the lecture. The professor mentions that help the Torreya reestablish in its original habitat is unlikely to success. She claims that the coolest and dampest area of the microclimate is strongly influenced by many worldwide climate effects such as the global warming, thus it is impossible for Torreya to thrive again in the same place.
Secondly, the writer contends that the second option to move Torreya to an entirely different location, far from its Florida microclimate it's will be success but it is unrealistic. The lecturer, however, rebuts this by asserting that she takes Black Locus as an example. Black Locus thrives quickly after entering a new habitat and endangers many scarce species. The professor points out the disastrous consequence.
Finally, it is stated in the article that the third option is to preserve Torreya in research centers won’t be a good method either. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits that Trees preserved in the center cannot resist diseases in the long run. the professor again opposes the last method in the reading passage.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 139, Rule ID: IT_IS[6]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: it's; it is
...tion, far from its Florida microclimate its will be success but it is unrealistic. ...
^^^
Line 7, column 254, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...cannot resist diseases in the long run. the professor again opposes the last method...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, third, thus, in fact, such as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1246.0 1373.03311258 91% => OK
No of words: 239.0 270.72406181 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.21338912134 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.93187294222 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76607964142 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 137.0 145.348785872 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.573221757322 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 378.9 419.366225166 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 50.4949482218 49.2860985944 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.0 110.228320801 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.0714285714 21.698381199 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.42857142857 7.06452816374 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.320685723711 0.272083759551 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0922073440877 0.0996497079465 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.104255564479 0.0662205650399 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.166342398085 0.162205337803 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.105410305163 0.0443174109184 238% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 13.3589403974 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.64 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.24 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.