The chart below show the amount of area used for growing fruit between 1993 and 2006 in Washington State (USA). Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The two bar charts compare and contrast data on changes in the amount of land used for growing apricots, prunes and plums in three agricultural regions in Washington State in America, over a 14-year period from 1993 to 2006.
In general, land devoted to growing all three types of fruits decreased in area, with the notable exception of Wenatchee, which began to use more land to grow prunes and plums.
Looking at the graph more closely, one can see that more land was devoted to prunes and plums in Yakima Valley than apricots, despite a dramatic fall from a little over 1,400 acres in 1993 to slightly under 600 acres in 2006. The only area to witness a peak in land usage in apricots was Wenatchee in 2001, with slightly more than 450 acres. From 2001 to 2006, the only areas to show no change in the number of acres used to grow prunes and plums were Wenatchee and other areas where land used to grow these kinds of fruits remained relatively constant at almost exactly 100 acres and 70 acres, respectively.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-01 | roadtoapro | 78 | view |
- The diagram below shows the amount of pork and chicken consumed in the US between 1960 and 2003 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
- The diagram below shows the amount of pork and chicken consumed in the US between 1960 and 2003 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
- The charts below show information about the top five supermarkets in the UK Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 73
- The graph below shows the consumption of 3 spreads from 1981 to 2007 67
- The diagram below shows time spent watching TV by age and gender in the UK in 1995 and 1999 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
look, as to, in general
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 7.0 43% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 33.7804878049 121% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 837.0 965.302439024 87% => OK
No of words: 182.0 196.424390244 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.5989010989 4.92477711251 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.67297393991 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.2519229261 2.65546596893 85% => OK
Unique words: 103.0 106.607317073 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.565934065934 0.547539520022 103% => OK
syllable_count: 252.0 283.868780488 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 5.0 8.94146341463 56% => 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: 36.0 22.4926829268 160% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 51.6735909339 43.030603864 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 167.4 112.824112599 148% => OK
Words per sentence: 36.4 22.9334400587 159% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.6 5.23603664747 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.09268292683 24% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.198959782 0.215688989381 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.11211405839 0.103423049105 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0737733783572 0.0843802449381 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.148042168127 0.15604864568 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.042165392835 0.0819641961636 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.4 13.2329268293 139% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.86 61.2550243902 85% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 10.3012195122 146% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.99 11.4140731707 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.89 8.06136585366 110% => OK
difficult_words: 40.0 40.7170731707 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 17.5 11.4329268293 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 16.4 10.9970731707 149% => OK
text_standard: 18.0 11.0658536585 163% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.