planting the genetically modified trees
Both the author and the lecturer discuss whether genetic modification improve characteristics of trees or not. The passage claims that planting the genetically modified trees provides some benefit for farmers and trees themselves. The professor, on the other hand, completely reject whatever mentioned in the reading through citing three reasons.
First, both the author and the professor talk about chance of survival. According to the passage, the genetically modified trees are resistance to the ring-spot problem. Thus, they are stronger than natural trees. The lecturer, nevertheless, rejects the author’s view and illustrates the idea that these trees resist in a particular situation and if climate, and the type of pests, to name but a few change, it is likely that all the trees be wipe out.
Second of all, both the reading and the lecture discuss the economical aspect of planting the genetically modified trees. The author argues that these modified trees have some economic benefits such as growing faster, providing more foods to name but a handful that lead to much investment for farmers. However, the professor refutes this, saying that modifying trees have several hide costs and farmers have to pay for seeds every time they plant.
Eventually, the passage and the lecture address the subject of exploitation. The passage goes on to mention that planting the genetically modified trees satisfies demands for wood or yield, so it prevent damaging the local wild trees. In contrast, the professor points out that these trees are destructive for natural trees because they grow fast among natural tress and use a great deal of water, light and so on, Therefore, they cause crowding out of natural trees.
All in all, the author maintains that the genetically modifying trees is positive change, while the professor not only completely cast doubt on it, but he also demonstrates that they impose some cost and problem to nature and farmers.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-08-07 | ghazalsaed1995 | 85 | view |
| 2019-08-07 | ghazalsaed1995 | 85 | view |
- Many scientists believe it would be possible to maintain a permanent human presence on Mars or the Moon. On the other hand, conditions on Venus are so extreme and inhospitable that maintaining a human presence there would be impossible. First, atmospheric 65
- TPO 26the zebra mussel 68
- Some parents offer their school-age children money for each high grade (mark) they get in school. Do you think this is a good idea? 76
- presence of human on Venus 65
- TPO 50Mars 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 401, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun change seems to be countable; consider using: 'few changes'.
Suggestion: few changes
...e, and the type of pests, to name but a few change, it is likely that all the trees be wip...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 196, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'prevents'?
Suggestion: prevents
...isfies demands for wood or yield, so it prevent damaging the local wild trees. In contr...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 390, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ng natural tress and use a great deal of water, light and so on, Therefore, they ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, thus, while, in contrast, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 7.30242825607 246% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1654.0 1373.03311258 120% => OK
No of words: 315.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25079365079 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6647309679 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 169.0 145.348785872 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536507936508 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 501.3 419.366225166 120% => 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: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.1974055739 49.2860985944 124% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.142857143 110.228320801 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.57142857143 7.06452816374 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.454161749587 0.272083759551 167% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.173162695927 0.0996497079465 174% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.155304095806 0.0662205650399 235% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.283974488974 0.162205337803 175% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0847723361854 0.0443174109184 191% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 13.3589403974 109% => 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: 13.47 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.