The reading and listening materials are contradicting with each other, in terms of several problems of farming tunas. The author of the article states three main reasons that make tuna farming difficult and expensive, however, the lecturer casts doubt about the claim mentioned by the author and refutes all the theories explained in the article.
First and foremost, the author argues that female tuna do not lay eggs in captivity, which means farmers must capture more wild tunas to make up for the stock, further declining the wild tuna populations. However, the lecturer offers a solution that injecting hormones into female tunas can incent them to lay eggs in captivity, which means there is no need to capture more wild tunas for selling.
Moreover, another topic of the debate is connected with that tuna farming is extremely expensive because feeding a tuna into mature can cost a huge amount of fish to provide them with nutrients and proteins, and the cost of these fishes is really a burden for farmers. However, the narrator refutes this theory by asserting that there are cheaper substitutions for those fishes. Some plants contain similar proteins but at a much lower price, those tuna farmers can purchase these plants to serve all the nutrient needs of tuna growing in a cost-effective way.
Finally, the author's third reason is that tuna confined to ocean cages are likely to become infested with parasites, which will weaken tuna, slow their growth, and even cause death. This claim is counteracted by the lecturer who points out that putting these ocean cages into a different environment can solve this problem. Parasites like blood flukes can only survive near shore in shallow water, while those tunas can grow up in deeper offshore positions. By locating these cages far from shore and dive them deeper, tunas can avoid being infested by those parasites and grow up healthly.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 536, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a cost-effective way" with adverb for "cost-effective"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
... all the nutrient needs of tuna growing in a cost-effective way. Finally, the authors third reason is ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, moreover, really, so, third, while, as for, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 5.01324503311 40% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1588.0 1373.03311258 116% => OK
No of words: 315.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04126984127 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.4213628882 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 178.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.565079365079 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 498.6 419.366225166 119% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 28.0 21.2450331126 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 47.6833564186 49.2860985944 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.363636364 110.228320801 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.6363636364 21.698381199 132% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.54545454545 7.06452816374 107% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.264915688702 0.272083759551 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101809473084 0.0996497079465 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0537342732455 0.0662205650399 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.154789514934 0.162205337803 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0264866103142 0.0443174109184 60% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 13.3589403974 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.06 53.8541721854 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.0289183223 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.54 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.34 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 63.6247240618 135% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 10.498013245 126% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => 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.