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, frogs help play a role in protecting humans by eating disease-carrying insects. Several methods have been proposed to solve the problem of declining frog populations.
First, frogs are being harmed by pesticides, which are chemicals used to prevent insects from damaging farm crops such as corn and sugarcane. Pesticides often spread from farmland into neighboring frog habitats. Once pesticides enter a frog’s body, they attack the nervous system, leading to severe breathing problems. If laws prohibited the farmers from using harmful pesticides near sensitive frog populations, it would significantly reduce the harm pesticides cause to frogs.
A second major factor in frog population decline is a fungus that has spread around the world with deadly effect. The fungus causes thickening of the skin, and since frogs use their skin to absorb water, infected frogs die of dehydration. Recently, researchers have discovered several ways to treat or prevent infection, including antifungal medication and treatments that kill the fungus with heat. Those treatments, if applied on a large scale, would protect sensitive frog populations from infection.
Third, in a great many cases, frog populations are in decline simply because their natural habitats are threatened. Since most frog species lay their eggs in water, they are dependent on water and wetland habitats. Many such habitats are threatened by human activities, including excessive water use or the draining of wetlands to make them suitable for development. If key water habitats such as lakes and marshes were better protected from excessive water use and development, many frog species would recover
The article introduces the topic of declines and extinctions of frog species. More specifically, the writer discusses different methods to solve this problem. The lecturer in the listening passage disagrees. She believes that these methods are impractical and hard to do it.
In the reading, the author begins by stating that pesticides affect frogs, so the laws should prohibit farmers from using pesticides harmful to frog populations. The lecturer, however, disagrees with this viewpoint. She states that this solution is unfair to farmers, and they are going to be at disadvantage with other zone farmers. Also, they should spend more money on other pesticides, so is not viable economically.
The author also claims that fungus is another problem for the frog population, so it is possible to do treatments to kill the fungus. Again, the lecturer believes there are flaws in the writer's argument. The speaker holds that this treatment is not possible because they need to do it with each frog, so it is not scalable. She says that this solution is complex and expensive.
Also, the reading passage notes that humans use excessive water so the frog habitats are threatened, so the lakes and marshes should be better protected. The person in the listening passage is doubtful that this is accurate. She suggests that global warming is modifying the habitat of frog populations.
To sum up, both the author and the lecturer hold conflicting views about the methods to solve the problem of frog extinctions.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-01-11 | sanddy | 80 | view |
| 2023-07-18 | dxy40747 | 3 | view |
| 2023-07-11 | YasamanEsml | 88 | view |
| 2023-07-10 | zuhn | 80 | view |
| 2023-07-07 | Hibahtabbaa | 71 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Because modern life is very complex it is essential for young people to have the ability to plan and organize Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 60
- 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 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 186, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...ecturer believes there are flaws in the writers argument. The speaker holds that this t...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, so, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 27.0 30.3222958057 89% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1272.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 247.0 270.72406181 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.14979757085 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96437052324 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.73739902821 2.5805825403 106% => OK
Unique words: 133.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.538461538462 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 384.3 419.366225166 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.287159049 49.2860985944 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.5 110.228320801 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.4375 21.698381199 71% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.0 7.06452816374 28% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0980484406162 0.272083759551 36% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0339422060979 0.0996497079465 34% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0531676068465 0.0662205650399 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0588846764844 0.162205337803 36% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0308978447505 0.0443174109184 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 13.3589403974 79% => 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: 12.29 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.79 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.