the pie chart below shows the main reasons why agricultural land becomes less productive. the tabel shows how these causes affected three regions of the world during the 1990s.
The pie graph illustrates the major causes of the decreasing productivity in farming land, and the table represents the consequences made by those changes in terms of agricultural space in three different areas in the earth in 1990s.
From the first graph, it is clear that too much grazing was the most important factor of all four reasons resulting the dropping of farming space all over the world, as 35% of total land were diminishing land because of over-grazing. And the other two vital factors were deforestation and unscientific cultivation, which counted for 30% and 28% respectively.
In the second graph, it is shown that the difference of these four factors influencing the degradation in different regions. In Oceania, it was over-grazing that ought to be responsible for the result of land dropping, as the portion was 11.3% while the total percentage of degrading land was only 13%. By contrast, the percentage of that factor was only one quarter in terms of farming land disappearing in Europe. However, over-cultivation was the crucial cause of land diminishing in North America, whose percentage was 3.3%. And the data was as twice as the over-grazing.
To sum up, over-grazing was the most major reason for farming land diminishing worldwide, but as for individual region, the portion of each cause varied a lot.
- The chart below shows the results of a survey about people s coffee and tea buying and drinking habits in five Australian cities Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 73
- the tables below give information about sales of Fairtarde labelled coffee and bananas in 1999 and 2004 in five European countries 56
- the graph below shows the consumption of fish and some differen kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004 73
- Countries are becoming more and more similar because people are able to buy the same products anywhere in the world Do you think this is a positive or negative development 73
- the plans below show a public park when it forst opened in 1920 and the same park today summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 67
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 225, Rule ID: IN_1990s[1]
Message: The article is probably missing here: 'in the 1990s'.
Suggestion: in the 1990s
...e in three different areas in the earth in 1990s. From the first graph, it is clear t...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, second, so, while, as for, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 7.0 200% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 9.0 5.60731707317 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 36.0 33.7804878049 107% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 3.97073170732 176% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1122.0 965.302439024 116% => OK
No of words: 219.0 196.424390244 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.12328767123 4.92477711251 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.84690116678 3.73543355544 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.06845238068 2.65546596893 116% => OK
Unique words: 118.0 106.607317073 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.538812785388 0.547539520022 98% => OK
syllable_count: 333.0 283.868780488 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 0.482926829268 828% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.4926829268 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.294560533 43.030603864 133% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.666666667 112.824112599 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3333333333 22.9334400587 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.77777777778 5.23603664747 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.09268292683 122% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.125443202688 0.215688989381 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0544753236936 0.103423049105 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0507167928044 0.0843802449381 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0946298910498 0.15604864568 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0473152587418 0.0819641961636 58% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 13.2329268293 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 61.2550243902 91% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 10.3012195122 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.71 11.4140731707 111% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.22 8.06136585366 102% => OK
difficult_words: 47.0 40.7170731707 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.4329268293 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.9970731707 105% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.