In recent years, many frog species around the world have declined in numbers or even gone extinct due to changes in their environment. These population declines and extinctions have serious consequences for the ecosystems in which frogs live; for example, frogs help play a role in protecting humans by eating disease-carrying insects. Several methods have been proposed to solve the problem of declining frog populations.
First, frogs are being harmed by pesticides, which are chemicals used to prevent insects from damaging farm crops such as corn and sugarcane. Pesticides often spread from farmland into neighboring frog habitats. Once pesticides enter a frog’s body, they attack the nervous system, leading to severe breathing problems. If laws prohibited the farmers from using harmful pesticides near sensitive frog populations, it would significantly reduce the harm pesticides cause to frogs.
A second major factor in frog population decline is a fungus that has spread around the world with deadly effect. The fungus causes thickening of the skin, and since frogs use their skin to absorb water, infected frogs die of dehydration. Recently, researchers have discovered several ways to treat or prevent infection, including antifungal medication and treatments that kill the fungus with heat. Those treatments, if applied on a large scale, would protect sensitive frog populations from infection.
Third, in a great many cases, frog populations are in decline simply because their natural habitats are threatened. Since most frog species lay their eggs in water, they are dependent on water and wetland habitats. Many such habitats are threatened by human activities, including excessive water use or the draining of wetlands to make them suitable for development. If key water habitats such as lakes and marshes were better protected from excessive water use and development, many frog species would recover.
In the reading material, the author gives 3 solutions to solve the problem of decreasing number of frogs, which may lead to serious damage to the ecosystems. Nevertheless, the lecturer in the listening material argues that none of these ideas offer practical solution towards the slowing down trend of frog's population, and opposes the points in the reading material.
First and foremost, the author argues that we can set rugulations to prohibit farmers from using pesticides, which have a negative impact on frogs. However, the lecturer offers an opposite stand that this is not economically practical or fair. Farmers rely on pesticides to gain more crops in order to get financial benefits. As a result, if the farmers near sensitive frog population are not allowed to use pesticides, they are at disadvantage compared to those in other areas and they may lose crops.
In addition, the lecturer casts doubt on the author's another idea that we can exert treat on frogs to free them from fungus, which thickens their skin and causes dehydration. The lecturer demonstrate that this process needs to be applied individually, which make it difficult because of the large scale of frogs. Furthermore, the treatment does not prevent frogs passing fungus to their offsprings, so we need to apply the treatment over and over again. Therefore, this solution is complicated as well as expensive.
Finally, the author's third proposion that we can limit excessive water use and development in order to give frogs a better natural habitats is also counteracted by the lecturer, who points out that it may be effective to do so but water use is not the biggest threat for their habitats. The lecturer further explains that it is global warming which leads to the decrease and extinction of many species and the global warming trend can not be prevented by only regulating the use of water.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 189, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'demonstrates'.
Suggestion: demonstrates
...in and causes dehydration. The lecturer demonstrate that this process needs to be applied i...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, therefore, third, well, in addition, as a result, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 30.3222958057 148% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1575.0 1373.03311258 115% => OK
No of words: 313.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03194888179 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20616286096 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74821302408 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 145.348785872 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.575079872204 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 488.7 419.366225166 117% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 21.2450331126 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 58.8236535946 49.2860985944 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 131.25 110.228320801 119% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.0833333333 21.698381199 120% => OK
Discourse Markers: 11.3333333333 7.06452816374 160% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.140160880291 0.272083759551 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0438705711416 0.0996497079465 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0291180908578 0.0662205650399 44% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0784854606213 0.162205337803 48% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0148765156952 0.0443174109184 34% => 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: 15.3 13.3589403974 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 53.8541721854 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.0289183223 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.19 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.37 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 63.6247240618 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.498013245 118% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.