Again, there was no significant difference between open and single-blind review models (figure 3).
Review quality was compared between open and single-blind review models using the unpaired Mann-Whitney U test.
For the Journal of Inflammation, however, no significant differences were seen in review quality between open and single-blind models (see online supplementary table S2).
Overall reviewer recommendations were similar in BMC Infectious Diseases compared with BMC Microbiology, suggesting no difference between open and single-blind peer review.
For BMC Infectious Diseases (open peer review) and BMC Microbiology (single-blind peer review) the numbers of reviewer recommendations of each kind were similar, suggesting a lack of difference between open and single-blind peer review models (figure 2).
This study was the first to analyse a large number of reviewer reports (800 in total) in both medical and biology journals, and compare quality of reviewer reports between open and single-blind peer review models and between author-suggested and non-author-suggested reviewers.
Because Q1 channels rapidly flicker between open and closed, single channel events cannot be directly observed; therefore, we indirectly determined whether PBA alters the permeation pathway of Q1 channels during the potentiation phase.
These results cannot be interpreted in terms of interconversion between a single open and single closed state, as modeled previously (7).
Furthermore, no significant differences in EMG activation time were found in single limb balance between open and closed eyes for the peroneus longus, gastrocnemius and rectus femoris muscles.
Furthermore, transitions between open and closed rings may be required for threading of a single polypeptide chain into the pore of the ClpB ring.
Our single-molecule FRET (smFRET) studies of Pol I KF) also indicate the existence of a conformation intermediate between open and closed complexes.
