Both the reading passage
and the lecture deal with the topic of frog population. The main ideas of the
reading passage are that the a number of the frog population is decline
has been decreasing gradually because of using
the the usage of pesticides by humans, spreading the fungus
and reducing frogs’ habitats, whereas the
professor argues a few points presented in the reading.
First of all, the professor contends that the idea of
prohibiting the pesticide is not a good way when we think of the economic loss. The
professor goes on to explain that if we cannot do not allow farmers to use the
pesticides, their productivity of crops might be severely reduced. This
contradicts the reading passage's claim that preventing pesticides will be
really helpful the human for people.
Moreover, the professor asserts that antifungal
meditation and treatment can cause other problems. Additionally, the professor
illustrates that antifungal meditation cannot adopt large scale of flogs
affect a large scale of frogs since they have different and complicated skin types, so we might be spending a lot of money. This
casts doubt on the reading passage's argument that if we applied apply the meditation on the
a large scale, it
would prevent sensitive frog
populations from infection.
Finally, the professor insists that making suitable
habitats for frogs are is
not an influential factor solved
to solve the problem. To be specific, the professor refutes that
global warming is the most powerful factor can that declines frog habitats. So making frog's
habitats of frogs is of are no use increasing
when it comes to increasing the population of flogs. This opposes the reading
passage, which mentions is that key water
habitat are better water use and development if key water habitats are developed, many frog species would recover.