The pie chart below shows the main reasons why agricultural land becomes less productive. The table shows how these causes affected three regions of the world during the 1990s.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The pie chart compares different reasons for global land degradation, while the table illustrates the impacts of three major causes of degraded land in three separate regions during the 1990s.
Overall, it is clear that animal grazing and tree clearance were the two biggest causes of degraded land. Furthermore, Europe was affected most severely by land degradation in the 1990s.
Roughly one-third of land becoming less productive was caused by over-grazing, followed by 30% of deforestation and 28% of too much crop cultivation. Other causes accounted for a tiny fraction at 7%.
Europe had the highest figure for degraded land, recording 23%, compared to 13% in Oceania and 5% in North America. Regarding causes of land degradation, it is worth noting that the main causes of European land degradation were tree clearance (9.9%) and over-cultivation (7.7%). In contrast, the land in North Africa was mainly degraded by cultivation (3.3%), while the biggest cause of degraded land in Oceania was animal grazing (11.3%).
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 224, Rule ID: WERE_VBB[1]
Message: Did you mean 'where' or 'we'?
Suggestion: where; we
...ain causes of European land degradation were tree clearance 9.9% and over-cultivatio...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, if, regarding, so, third, while, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 7.0 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 33.7804878049 77% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 3.97073170732 277% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 858.0 965.302439024 89% => OK
No of words: 162.0 196.424390244 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2962962963 4.92477711251 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.56762134501 3.73543355544 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87187667897 2.65546596893 108% => OK
Unique words: 96.0 106.607317073 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.592592592593 0.547539520022 108% => OK
syllable_count: 253.8 283.868780488 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => 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: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.8947605074 43.030603864 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.25 112.824112599 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.25 22.9334400587 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.125 5.23603664747 136% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 3.70975609756 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 1.13902439024 527% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.219461594923 0.215688989381 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101789992233 0.103423049105 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0696447689826 0.0843802449381 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147147225752 0.15604864568 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0646581214994 0.0819641961636 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.2329268293 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 61.2550243902 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.46 11.4140731707 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.72 8.06136585366 108% => OK
difficult_words: 42.0 40.7170731707 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.4329268293 74% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => 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.