The reading claims that human are dedicated to solve the problem of declining frog populations. The author elaborates on his viewpoints by providing three main methods. Nevertheless, the professor believes that these concepts have severe weaknesses and refutes each of them.
First, the reading avers that the prohibition of pesticides using near sensitive frog populations will contribute to the frog population saving because pesticides do great harm to frogs. Once pesticides enter a frog's body, they attack the nervous system, leading to severe breathing problems. However, the professor refutes this concept by stating that the action is not economically practical owing to if farmers stop using pesticides, there will be other aspects of questions appear. For instance, the yield will decrease dramatically.
Furthermore, the article deposits that using antifungal medication and treatments that kill the fungus with heat can help to slow down the rate of frog population decline because the action can protect sensitive frog population from infection. Otherwise, frog are easily affected by fungus thickening their skin, which results in frog's dehydration. On the other hand, the lecturer mentions that this method is complicated and expensive because it has to be used individually on each frogs on a large scale, which is impractial. Besides, people have to capture each of them and treat them. Pluw, we do not know whether frogs will pass down fungus to their offspring, which means researchers have to catch the new generation again.
Finally, the article asserts that many frog species can reover when key water habitats such as lakes and marshes are better protected from excessive water use and development since most frog species lay their eggs in water and they are dependent on water and wetland habitats. Conversely, the lecturer casts doubt on the claim by stating that it is the global warming rather than human activities contributes to the disappearence of wetlands. Therefore, the limit of human water usage will not help in protecting frog population.
Essay topics
Votes
Essay reference notes: This topic is refereed from another essay topic, developed by user: Bobby-Shi02
Essay Categories
No. of Words: 326 250
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 24 in 30
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 5 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 8 2
No. of Sentences: 15 12
No. of Words: 326 250
No. of Characters: 1716 1200
No. of Different Words: 188 150
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.249 4.2
Average Word Length: 5.264 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.679 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 120 80
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 98 60
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 66 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 53 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.733 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.692 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.31 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.31 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.081 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 4