The golden frog is a small bright-yellow amphibian that lives in and around mountain streams in Panama The species is severely endangered because of a fungus that infects the frog through its skin and inhibits the frog's critical life functions, such as breathing. Conservationists have proposed a few solutions to the golden frog's fungus problem.
Bacterial Protection
First, scientists have identified a natural enemy of the fungus: a type of bacterium. This bacterium produces a chemical that kills fungal cells. Scientists think that they may be able to introduce colonies of this bacterium to the skin of golden frogs. The bacterial colonies would then protect the frogs against the fungus infection
Breeding Frogs in Captivity
Second, researchers are considering the possibility of breeding golden frogs in captivity and then releasing them in the wild to replenish wild populations The golden frog can develop disease-free in captivity; where it is isolated from the fungus When golden frogs bred in captivity are released in habitats where wild golden frogs have died out, the frogs bred in captivity will give rise to a healthy, fungus-free population.
A Natural Defense
Third, it is possible that golden frogs w川 overcome the threat posed by the fungus without human intervention. Some golden frogs have what seems to be a natural defense against the fungus. When infected, they increase their body temperature, which slows down the growth of the fungus If this ability to resist the fungal infection spreads among the golden frog population as a whole, the frog population is likely to overcome the crisis and start increasing again.
The article states that the golden frog is endangered because of a fungus infection leading to the frog dying of disease. The passage goes on to introduce three approaches for the protection and recovery of the golden frog population. However, the professor explains that the suggestions presented by the author are ineffective.
First, the reading claims that introducing a type of bacterium to the skin of the frogs protects the golden frogs from fungus infection. The professor refutes this point, explaining that the bacteria only releases the chemical effective against the fungus at the start of its colonization. Hence, this solution is temporary and would not last in the long run.
Second, the article posits that humans can breed frogs in captivity and release healthy frogs in the wild to increase the frog population. But the professor explains that the released frogs won't stay healthy for long due to contact with animals carrying the fungus infection. So, the golden frogs will get infected again due to contact with other animals in the wild.
Third, the reading points out that some frogs have developed a natural defense against the fungus by raising their body temperature. If this natural ability spreads, the frog population may recover. However, the professor opposes this idea pointing out that frogs expend a considerable amount of energy to raise their body temperature, leading them to become weak and unhealthy. Hence, they might die of other causes, and the population won't rise.
- Some people like to keep a record of their own experiences by uploading pictures and other information to social networking sites Other people prefer not to create such records Which approach do you prefer and why Use specific reasons and examples to supp 80
- 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 fro 85
- It is commonly believed that in life success is not the most important thing it is more important to remain happy and optimistic when we fail Do you agree with that idea Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer Be sure to use your own word 73
- These days if you pick up a newspaper or turn on the TV or radio you may hear or read about the advantages of driverless cars also called self driving or autonomous cars The technology is simple to understand using sensors and computers these cars can dri 80
- You have 20 minutesto plan and write your response Your response will be judged on the basis of the quality of your writing and on how well your response presents the points in the lecture and their relationship to the reading passage Typically an effecti 3
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, hence, however, if, may, second, so, third
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 10.4613686534 29% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 30.3222958057 102% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.01324503311 199% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1267.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 244.0 270.72406181 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19262295082 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.95227774224 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60839647976 2.5805825403 101% => OK
Unique words: 133.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.545081967213 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 385.2 419.366225166 92% => 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: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.074926144 49.2860985944 69% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.4615384615 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.7692307692 21.698381199 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.15384615385 7.06452816374 59% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.287520995504 0.272083759551 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.112011134525 0.0996497079465 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.098719837125 0.0662205650399 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.190856983571 0.162205337803 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0581089586702 0.0443174109184 131% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 53.8541721854 99% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.82 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.28 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 58.0 63.6247240618 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.