The pie chart below shows the main reasons why agricultural land becomes less productive. The table shows how these causes affected three regions of the world during the 1990s.
The above visual reveals the information regarding several primary factors that contribute to less production from agriculture, which leads to severe impacts on several selected nations in the table below.
Overall, as is observed from the mentioned images, overgrazing and over-cultivation were the main culprits of the reduction of productivity with the Eurozone witnessing the highest proportion of land degradation.
To begin with, these data sources markedly communicate that overgrazing by livestock has the most vital element in the land becoming degraded at 35%. A mere gap can be seen in over-cultivation with 30%, which was followed by 28% deforested. Despite having the 3rd reason to explain why the land was degraded, deforestation was quadrupling other causes which were merely responsible for 7% of the land.
Turning to the table, Europe visibly suffered from the most serious result with 23% of the total land degraded. Of this land, the main cause was deforestation and the least one was over-grazing with about 9,8 and 5,5, respectively. On the contrary, overgrazing (11,2%) was majorly part of 13% of Oceania’s land degradation. Conversely, no damage was made from over-cultivation in this region while deforestation affected only a relatively small amount (1,7%). Eventually, North America had the lowest percentage at only 5% with 3,3% from over-cultivation.
- The maps below show the village of Stokeford in 1930 and 2010 89
- The chart below gives information about Scotland s main exports in 2000 20 and future projections for 2025 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant
- The graph and table below show the average monthly temperatures and the average number of hours of sunshine per year in three major cities Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 73
- Nowadays technology is increasingly being used to monitor what people are saying and doing for example through cell phone tracking and security cameras In many cases the people being monitored are unaware that this is happening 84
- Some people work for the same organization all their working life Others think it is better to work for different organizations Discuss both these views and give your own opinion 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, regarding, so, while, on the contrary, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 7.0 157% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 33.7804878049 130% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 3.97073170732 353% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1181.0 965.302439024 122% => OK
No of words: 212.0 196.424390244 108% => OK
Chars per words: 5.57075471698 4.92477711251 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.81578560438 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.2930440892 2.65546596893 124% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 106.607317073 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.655660377358 0.547539520022 120% => OK
syllable_count: 360.9 283.868780488 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.45097560976 117% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.4552705798 43.030603864 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.1 112.824112599 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.2 22.9334400587 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.9 5.23603664747 132% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 3.70975609756 27% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 1.13902439024 702% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.09268292683 24% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.14192060415 0.215688989381 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0546192015628 0.103423049105 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0366967756147 0.0843802449381 43% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0846736425463 0.15604864568 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0148440329249 0.0819641961636 18% => 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: 15.4 13.2329268293 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 61.2550243902 68% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 10.3012195122 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.03 11.4140731707 132% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.67 8.06136585366 120% => OK
difficult_words: 67.0 40.7170731707 165% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.4329268293 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.0658536585 136% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.