In the 1950s Torreya taxifolia, a type of evergreen tree once very common in the state of Florida, started to die out. No one is sure exactly what caused the decline, but chances are good that if nothing is done, Torreya will soon become extinct. Experts are considering three ways to address the decline of Torreya.
The first option is to reestablish Torreya in the same location in which it thrived for thousands of years. Torreya used to be found in abundance in the northern part of Florida, which has a specific microclimate. A microclimate exists when weather conditions inside a relatively small area differ from the region of which that area is a part. Northern Florida's microclimate is very favorable to Torreya's growth. This microclimate is wetter and cooler than the surrounding region's relatively dry, warm climate. Scientists have been working to plant Torreya seeds in the coolest, dampest areas of the microclimate.
The second option is to move Torreya to an entirely different location, far from its Florida microclimate. Torreya seeds and saplings have been successfully planted and grown in forests further north, where the temperature is significantly cooler. Some scientists believe that Torreya probably thrived in areas much further north in the distant past, so by relocating it now, in a process known as assisted migration, humans would simply be helping Torreya return to an environment that is more suited to its survival.
The third option is to preserve Torreya in research centers. Seeds and saplings can be moved from the wild and preserved in a closely monitored environment where it will be easier for scientists both to protect the species and to conduct research on Torreya. This research can then be used to ensure the continued survival of the species.
The reading and the lecturer both talk about the reservation of torreya which is endangered in a particular area. Whereas the reading states that the tree species can be saved by three specific solutions, the lecturer suggests that those can not be a better solution. The lecturer casts doubts on the main points made in reading by providing three reasons.
First of all, according to the reading, torreya can be reestablished in the same location under the same conditions where they evolve for the past thousands of years. However, the lecturer disputes this point. She says that the environmental condition of the native area had been changed for the previous few years either due to global warming or drained through the other areas and the coolest microclimate are now turning into the dryer
and worm climate.
Secondly, the reading states that the tree species can be transformed into a new coolest region to protect the species from declination. Nevertheless, the lecturer refutes this argument. He argues that a few years ago a new endangered species were introduced to a new area to protect but that species spread so quickly and also destroyed the native species. Thus, comparing to that event the lecturer casts that this is uncertain to move torreya to the new location to conserve.
Finally , the reading claims that , the species can be conserved in the research centers in an environment that is most suitable for the tree. On the other hand, the lecturer believes that,to conserve the tree in reasearch center may hamper the species by reducing it's deaseaes protectability and also may change the genetic strongness.
In conclusion, although the reading and the lecturer both talks about the conservation of torreya but the three main points made by the reading are effectively challenged by the lecturer.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-10 | faisalaldebei | 81 | view |
| 2020-01-05 | Shiimaaa | 80 | view |
| 2020-01-05 | Shiimaaa | 76 | view |
| 2020-01-04 | S M Naimul Mamun | 3 | view |
| 2020-01-04 | S M Naimul Mamun | 3 | view |
- Astro 3
- The cane toad is a large (1.8 kg) amphibian species native to Central and South America. It was deliberately introduced to Australia in 1935 with the expectation that it would protect farmers' crops by eating harmful insects. Unfortunately, the toad 85
- sub 3
- A recent study reveals that people, especially young people, are reading far less literature—novels, plays, and poems—than they used to. This is troubling because the trend has unfortunate effects for the reading public, for culture in general, and fo 76
- tree 60
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 233, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this can' or 'those cans'?
Suggestion: this can; those cans
...c solutions, the lecturer suggests that those can not be a better solution. The lecturer ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: And
...limate are now turning into the dryer and worm climate. Secondly, the readin...
^^^
Line 13, column 8, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...e new location to conserve. Finally , the reading claims that , the species c...
^^
Line 13, column 34, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
.... Finally , the reading claims that , the species can be conserved in the res...
^^
Line 13, column 189, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , to
...e other hand, the lecturer believes that,to conserve the tree in reasearch center m...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, may, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, thus, whereas, in conclusion, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 5.01324503311 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1546.0 1373.03311258 113% => OK
No of words: 300.0 270.72406181 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15333333333 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16179145029 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7294571633 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 154.0 145.348785872 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.513333333333 0.540411800872 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 454.5 419.366225166 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.5753127262 49.2860985944 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.923076923 110.228320801 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0769230769 21.698381199 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.9230769231 7.06452816374 155% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0584658198481 0.272083759551 21% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0242439240133 0.0996497079465 24% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0214525567342 0.0662205650399 32% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0365089982631 0.162205337803 23% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00989780105409 0.0443174109184 22% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.3589403974 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 53.8541721854 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.78 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 63.6247240618 119% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.