1.Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic regions. They search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of the year. Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed and cold enough,

The author is trying the prove that arctics deer lives only dependent on the frozen sea in that wast arctic region's. Author claims that the habitat are limited to the warm areas, deer need to wander in arctic to search for food in those areas. Limited availability is of foods shows lack of research done by author about arctic deer's habitats. Global warming reports have not being discussed in detail so any conclusion regarding the same can't be made. Just because the report was published in same time period dosen't bolster the hypothesis. Overall the hypothesis looks very superficial with reality.

Arctic deer would have adjusted their selves with the changing scenarios to meet their living needs. The hunters are the main reason for the declining population of deers. The invasion of humans in those habitat would definitely create issues for deers which would have resulted in migration of deer in far reaching places where it is difficult for humans to reach. On the other hand author has not mentioned the time in which the observation was recorded. Their adaptable nature would have directed them to avoid the hunting area. There are chances that certain warm areas suitable for plants are unreachable for humans. Continuous intrusion in deer's habitat would have forced deers to concentrate themselves in those areas.

Global warming is long known issue but the period of the deer decline in population is not mentioned. This leads to ambiguity about the effect of same on different region of earth. Global warming affect cannot be validated in all the seasons. Season specific reason can only be valid if the same happens only in summer. On a bigger perspective seasonal issues are unlikely to lead such bigger problems like population decline.

Though the topic present a cardinal issue, it puts a lot of confusion among readers mind because of partial facts and data. It is evident that global warming is concern for all but the direct impact of the same in Arctic deer is no conceivable.

Votes
Average: 4.3 (3 votes)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 22, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
The author is trying the prove that arctics deer lives only dependent ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 37, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'arctics'' or 'arctic's'?
Suggestion: arctics'; arctic's
The author is trying the prove that arctics deer lives only dependent on the frozen...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 440, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...il so any conclusion regarding the same cant be made. Just because the report was pu...
^^^^
Line 3, column 199, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this habitat' or 'those habitats'?
Suggestion: this habitat; those habitats
...ion of deers. The invasion of humans in those habitat would definitely create issues for deer...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 154, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...to ambiguity about the effect of same on different region of earth. Global warmin...
^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, look, regarding, so, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 11.1786427146 27% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 17.0 28.8173652695 59% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 55.5748502994 85% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 16.3942115768 30% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1676.0 2260.96107784 74% => OK
No of words: 336.0 441.139720559 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.9880952381 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.28139028586 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.41229372128 2.78398813304 87% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 204.123752495 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.559523809524 0.468620217663 119% => OK
syllable_count: 521.1 705.55239521 74% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.8473053892 70% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.9507771916 57.8364921388 50% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 83.8 119.503703932 70% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.8 23.324526521 72% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.35 5.70786347227 41% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.203125649119 0.218282227539 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0606248934937 0.0743258471296 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0606655442452 0.0701772020484 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113342394523 0.128457276422 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0646030242425 0.0628817314937 103% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 14.3799401198 73% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 48.3550499002 114% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.37 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.94 8.32208582834 107% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 98.500998004 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 11.1389221557 75% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.

flaws:
minimum 3 arguments wanted.

----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 337 350
No. of Characters: 1647 1500
No. of Different Words: 189 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.285 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.887 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.372 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 127 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 77 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 48 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 32 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 17.737 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.309 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.263 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.28 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.475 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.043 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5