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 passage, the author descusses three kinds of the problems caused to the decline the number of the frogs and sometimes their extiction and gives solutions to those problems, while the lecturer claims that what the reading passages states is not feasible and disputes those solutions presented in the reading passage by several proofs.
The belief in the reading passage is that human can help to save the frog population, if some laws prohibit formers from useing the harmful pesticides. However, the speaker refutes those cailmand says thie solutions isn't economical. The formers lose lots of their crobs, if they don't use the pesticides for their crobs.
Second, the writer states that the seperation off the fungus around the world is the main cause of the frogs decline. On the other hand, there are some treatments to kill the fungus and if this treat ment uses in the large scale, it will protect the frog populations from infection. By contraste, the lecturer views to this issue from an opposite angle. According with the lecturer, treatment should be use to the individual frogs. Therefore, it is unpractical. Moreover, this treat should be use regulary, since it don't develop to their offsprings.
Thrid, the writer argues that the frog population decline becouse their natural habitats are threatened. Therefore, by saving lakes and marshell it id possiable to save the frogs, while the speaker, demonastrates a different idea that frongs declined bocause if the climate changes exticts lots of the spices whicth is lived in the lacks and marshaels.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 217, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...utes those cailmand says thie solutions isnt economical. The formers lose lots of th...
^^^^
Line 3, column 280, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...rmers lose lots of their crobs, if they dont use the pesticides for their crobs. ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 404, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'used'?
Suggestion: used
... with the lecturer, treatment should be use to the individual frogs. Therefore, it ...
^^^
Line 5, column 404, Rule ID: BE_USE_TO_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'used'?
Suggestion: used
... with the lecturer, treatment should be use to the individual frogs. Therefore, it ...
^^^
Line 5, column 494, Rule ID: SHOULD_BE_DO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'used'?
Suggestion: used
...actical. Moreover, this treat should be use regulary, since it dont develop to thei...
^^^
Line 5, column 517, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
... treat should be use regulary, since it dont develop to their offsprings. Thrid,...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, moreover, second, so, therefore, while, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 12.0772626932 41% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1328.0 1373.03311258 97% => OK
No of words: 258.0 270.72406181 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14728682171 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.00778971557 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56071047695 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.581395348837 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 397.8 419.366225166 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.25165562914 399% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 84.9264387573 49.2860985944 172% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.666666667 110.228320801 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5 21.698381199 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.83333333333 7.06452816374 83% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 4.19205298013 143% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.158348765005 0.272083759551 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0518479687447 0.0996497079465 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0499153368514 0.0662205650399 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0919656485975 0.162205337803 57% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0297008365173 0.0443174109184 67% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.3589403974 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.59 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.08 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.