Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(2)
Exact(1)
Figure 5 shows the number and distance distribution of movement between producer types using either a haulier or own vehicles.
Similar(59)
Most distances between producer types are small; median distances ranged from 6.4 km (from small producers to professionals, Q1-Q3 6.4 km-11 km) to 48 km (from professionals to professionals, Q1-Q3 27 km-139 km).
We further identified differences between producer types in several animal movement characteristics which are known to increase the risk of disease spread.
The calculated values of the E-I (external - internal) index, a measure of group assortativity, between producer types are described in Table 3.
In addition to the fact that all producer types showed some movements using private vehicles, it is clear that they behaved differently when moving animals.
We therefore anticipated that small producers would show a high degree of interaction with other producer types.
The distribution of distances travelled by each batch between producers as a function of the producer type of destination and departure is described in Figure 5.
Use of a haulier is strongly dependent on the producer type of departure.
We have examined the dynamics of non-renewable resource extraction for a monopolistic producer using resource exploration and two types of technological change.
Professional producers and small producers showed tendencies to strictly receive (−0.57 and −0.26 respectively) or send (−0.54 and −0.79 respectively) pigs to producers with the same producer type, whereas non-assured commercial producers tended to trade (0.52 and 0.34 for sending and receiving, respectively) with professional or small producers rather than other non-assured commercial producers.
Chilean oenologist Patricio Tapia adds that while Chilean pisco producers usually mix vine stocks, Peruvian producers have specific pisco types that use the aromatic qualities of vines such as Yellow Muscat and Italia.
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