The first illustration reveals the leading causes of land degradation around the globe while the second figure presents three large locations affected by these reasons during 1990s.
Overgrazing accounts for 35% of the worldwide land degradation. It is followed by cutting of trees illegally or legally with 30% and over cultivation was 2 % less than that of deforestation. Only 7% was responsible for other reasons why land was becoming less productive.
Meanwhile, the other graph showed that Europe had the highest percentage of land being wasted with 23% total. Its leading cause of land wasting was deforestation with 9.8% followed by over cultivation with 7.7% and lastly overgrazing with 1.5%. Oceania, however, had 13% sum of agricultural land that became unproductive and this was mainly because of overgrazing with 11.3% and cutting down trees with 1.7%. Subsequently, North America's top cause of land degradation was over cultivation with 3.3%compared to Oceania who had no account for it. Overgrazing in North America was 1.5% while deforestation was 0.2%
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 169, Rule ID: IN_1990s[1]
Message: The article is probably missing here: 'during the 1990s'.
Suggestion: during the 1990s
...rge locations affected by these reasons during 1990s. Overgrazing accounts for 35% of the...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 271, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ing with 1.5%. Oceania, however, had 13% sum of agricultural land that became unp...
^^
Line 5, column 322, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ricultural land that became unproductive and this was mainly because of overgrazi...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, lastly, second, so, while, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 7.0 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 8.0 5.60731707317 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 28.0 33.7804878049 83% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 3.97073170732 252% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 906.0 965.302439024 94% => OK
No of words: 167.0 196.424390244 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.4251497006 4.92477711251 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.59483629437 3.73543355544 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.00394204346 2.65546596893 113% => OK
Unique words: 104.0 106.607317073 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.622754491018 0.547539520022 114% => OK
syllable_count: 263.7 283.868780488 93% => 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: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 3.36585365854 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.4926829268 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 39.4968353163 43.030603864 92% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.666666667 112.824112599 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5555555556 22.9334400587 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.33333333333 5.23603664747 102% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 3.70975609756 27% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 1.13902439024 615% => Less 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: 0.183887737683 0.215688989381 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.081138687558 0.103423049105 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.06989999048 0.0843802449381 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.146270447465 0.15604864568 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0526817976883 0.0819641961636 64% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 13.2329268293 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 61.2550243902 87% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.3012195122 100% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.21 11.4140731707 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.41 8.06136585366 104% => OK
difficult_words: 41.0 40.7170731707 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.4329268293 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.9970731707 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => 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.