Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(3)
The benthics were 11 months of age with an average standard length (± S.E.M). of 5.0±0.1 cm, and the marines were 8 months of age with an average standard length of 4.9±0.1 cm.
Benthics were 18 months old with an average standard length (± S.E.M). of 4.3±0.3 cm and marines were 10 months old with an average standard length (± S.E.M). of 3.2±0.2 cm.
To that end, we separated them from their original groups at an average standard length (SL) of 27.8 mm ± 1.6 min (mean ± SD; N = 13, min = 25 mm, max = 30 mm), i.e. they were not sexually mature at the onset of the experiment [ 25].
Similar(57)
Average standard lengths (± S.E.M). of fish were: benthics, 5.1±0.1 cm; marines, 4.9±0.1 cm.
Nine fish per population were tested in the stationary plant trials; these fish were siblings of and the same age as the fish in experiment 3. Average standard lengths (± S.E.M). of fish were: benthics, 4.9±0.1 cm; marines, 4.9±0.1 cm.
Average standard lengths in cm ± SEM of the fish were: Japanese Pacific (5.0 ± 0.06), Paxton Benthic (5.0 ± 0.15), and F2s (4.72 ± 0.03).
Stationarity was assessed using the Potential Scale Reduction Factor data and plots of likelihood scores, tree length and average standard deviation of split frequencies against the number of generations.
We estimated the effect of (1) by taking an average standard deviation for a bond length (∼ 0.005 Å) and, using a sample of nine ions (H+, Na+, Mg2+, Al3+, S6+, Zn2+, La3+, Pb2+, Th4+), determined the effect of varying bond lengths by ± 0.005 Å on the RMSD.
The average standard deviation of the dimer SSR length with +/-11.9 bp is more than two times larger than that of trimer SSRs with only +/- 5.2 bp.
Statistical analyses were performed using the StatPlus:mac AnalystSoft Inc./2009 software to calculate the average, standard deviation and compare the mean length values.
The SSRs had an average length of 25.17 bp, an average standard deviation of 10.55 bp and a density of 376.12/Mb.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com