The graph below show the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a Europeon country between 1979 and 2004.
The line graph compares the amount of fish, chicken, beef and lamb people in a European country consumed weekly per person over a period of 25 years.
From 1979 to 2004, the consumption of fish in this European country had always been far less than meat with a steady amount of approximately 50 grammes per week per person. As for the trends of meat consumption, the chicken had risen to become the most eaten meat in the year of 2004 compared with the gradual decrease of beef and lamb.
Despite a small spike appeared in 1984 for beef consumption, the line illustrates a general downward trend, making it the second most eaten meat in the year of 2004 whereas beef was the most consumed meat per week dropped from around 225 grams to 100 grams per person, showing a decrease of 125 grams for these 25 years.
People in this European country ate roughly 150 grammes of chicken or lamb per week /per person in 1979. However, 25 years after 1979, the consumption of chicken rose significantly to around 250 grammes per week while the amount of lamb consumed dropped to a little higher than 50 grammes weekly. The opposite trend between chicken and lamb consumption eventually made a gap of 100 grammes in 2004.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-01-07 | dilpreet7528 | view | |
| 2021-01-07 | dilpreet7528 | view | |
| 2021-01-07 | dilpreet7528 | view | |
| 2021-01-07 | dilpreet7528 | 56 | view |
| 2021-01-07 | dilpreet7528 | 61 | view |
- The graph below show the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a Europeon country between 1979 and 2004 56
- Compare the town of brindle and local areas in 1800 1900 and 2000 summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
- The chart below shows the percentage of UK households with selected consumers durable between 1996 to 2006 73
- children are facing more pressures nowadays from academic social and commercial perspectives What are the causes of these pressures and what measures should be taken to reduce these pressures 89
- The graph below show the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a Europeon country between 1979 and 2004
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, second, so, whereas, while, as for
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 2.0 7.0 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 0.0 3.15609756098 0% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 33.7804878049 110% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 3.97073170732 126% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1004.0 965.302439024 104% => OK
No of words: 215.0 196.424390244 109% => OK
Chars per words: 4.66976744186 4.92477711251 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82921379641 3.73543355544 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.414065508 2.65546596893 91% => OK
Unique words: 107.0 106.607317073 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.497674418605 0.547539520022 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 277.2 283.868780488 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => 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: 30.0 22.4926829268 133% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 68.1780382378 43.030603864 158% => OK
Chars per sentence: 143.428571429 112.824112599 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.7142857143 22.9334400587 134% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.71428571429 5.23603664747 128% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 3.70975609756 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.09268292683 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.183577937186 0.215688989381 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.10278343427 0.103423049105 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0414291944791 0.0843802449381 49% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.121809713164 0.15604864568 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0444802750389 0.0819641961636 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.9 13.2329268293 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 66.41 61.2550243902 108% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.3012195122 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.4 11.4140731707 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.47 8.06136585366 93% => OK
difficult_words: 32.0 40.7170731707 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.4329268293 114% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 10.9970731707 127% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.0658536585 145% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.