tpo18.
Both the reading and listening parts offer two opposite viewpoints about the methods for saving the endanger Torreya trees. While the passage lists three solutions to prevent the possible extinction, the lecturer considers them as unsatisfactory.
First of all, the text posits that the reestablishing the Torreya in the same location, in which is wet and cool and Torreya survived for thousands of years, can be an effective option to prevent the extinction. However, the instructor casts doubt on the validity of this plan. As she explains, there is striking alteration in the ecological condition of this place, it is neither wet nor cool. There is the possibility that based on global warming and drained wetland this specific spot gets warmer and drier. Consequently, this place does not provide that suitable location for Torreya to survive.
Secondly, the article motions to the complete alteration of location and moving Torreya to further north to help it to survive; on the contrary, the professor refutes this idea too. As she asserts the same plan is implemented in another case, and that endangered species in its new territory grow in the high and invasive way that killed other native animals and plants of that region and put them in the risk of extinction. Thus, this transportation can lead to other unpredictable outcomes.
Finally, meanwhile, the passage purposes the preserving the Torreya in research centers to monitor them easily, the professor rejects this proposal too. As she describes, the preserved species in the research centers are not resistance in illness. The main factor for persisting the disease is the genetical diversity; on the other hand since the research center does not possess the high compacity to cover the entire diversities, the trees kept in the research centers are in danger of disease. So, the purpose of keeping trees in the research center cannot protect them too.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 97, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...viewpoints about the methods for saving the endanger Torreya trees. While the passage lists ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, finally, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, thus, while, in fact, first of all, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 30.3222958057 129% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1622.0 1373.03311258 118% => OK
No of words: 312.0 270.72406181 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.19871794872 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20279927342 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75333012164 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 172.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.551282051282 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 489.6 419.366225166 117% => 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: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.700442688 49.2860985944 121% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.857142857 110.228320801 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2857142857 21.698381199 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.64285714286 7.06452816374 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => 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: 0.266534848773 0.272083759551 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.085527244528 0.0996497079465 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0816977617502 0.0662205650399 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147880991096 0.162205337803 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0555490203862 0.0443174109184 125% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.28 8.42419426049 110% => OK
difficult_words: 90.0 63.6247240618 141% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => 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.