The author talks about the protection of forests from infections of various fungus and provides several methods. But the professor of lecture disagrees with the author and gives the counterpart analysis about each method and stated that those methods have serious limitations.
First of all, the reading states that removing spores would help to stop spreading the infection. And it can be done by encouraging hikers to use washed shoes and new bike instruments. But the lecture contends this point by saying that making human-assisted work will not affect to prevent this. Because human-created spores are washed by rainfall and carry long away from this. So, washing shoes and using new equipment is not be a solution.
Secondly, the passage posits that using a few fungicidal chemicals can help to protect the oak trees which galvanize their defensive power. On the contrary, the professor refutes this possibility because using chemical can be a solution for a short time. And it can be useful for direct infection not for the whole forest. Considering a small garden or park it can be easy but for the forest, it will be time consuming and expensive.
Lastly, the author avers that clear-cutting practice will be a method for protecting the infection. Because it will prevent the spreading of infection from infected areas to healthy areas. Again the lecture also rebuts this by stating that it can be a bad choice. Many plans may not available everyplace. If clear-cutting practice will be done this place, these plants will not available anymore. Not only this but also it could destroy many healthy plants of an area.
Considering all of these reasons the author said that those methods may have some limitations.
- In 1995 a microscopic fungus called phytophthora ramorum, or P. ramorum, was first detected in the forests of the western United States. P. ramorum infects trees and causes particularly serious damage in oak trees: in many infected oaks, leaves wither rap 3
- Tpo 38In 1995 a microscopic fungus called Phytophthora ramorum, or P. ramorum, was first detected in the forests of the western United States. P. ramorum infects trees and causes particularly serious damage in oak trees: in many infected oaks, leaves with 3
- TPO-02 - Integrated Writing Task In many organizations, perhaps the best way to approach certain new projects is to assemble a group of people into a team. Having a team of people attack a project offers several advantages. 73
- Some young adults want independence from their parents as soon as possible. Other young adults prefer to live with their families for a longer time. Which of these situations do you think is better? 60
- TPO 38 Integrated writing 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 429, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'been'.
Suggestion: been
...ng shoes and using new equipment is not be a solution. Secondly, the passage po...
^^
Line 7, column 101, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Because” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... a method for protecting the infection. Because it will prevent the spreading of infect...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, lastly, may, second, secondly, so, as to, first of all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 5.04856512141 317% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1449.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 285.0 270.72406181 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08421052632 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68836051167 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.543859649123 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 443.7 419.366225166 106% => 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: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 1.51434878587 264% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 27.7292910159 49.2860985944 56% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 80.5 110.228320801 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.8333333333 21.698381199 73% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.16666666667 7.06452816374 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => 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: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => 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: 10.4 13.3589403974 78% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.89 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.48 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => 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.