Suggestions(1)
Exact(1)
Additionally, the fact that the phase relationship between sampling and light differed throughout the one-month examination in jet-lagged animals, yet the increase in cortisol was maintained relative to controls until Day 25, further suggests that light was unlikely to impact interpretation of these findings.
Similar(58)
No difference was found between samples of light and dark sampled tap-roots from the same developmental time point.
The most of the examined genes showed increase in their expression during the first 12 hours of the study in the plants treated with monochromatic light compared with plants kept in darkness or under white light, even though variation between samples and time points was high (Additional file 2).
The distance between the samples and the light source was fixed at 5 cm.
Thus, metabolic labeling reduces the systematic errors that may accumulate during sample preparation between the heavy and light samples [14].
A, Number of differentially expressed unigenes between samples L2 (under light condition) and D2 (under dark condition).
B, Number of differentially expressed unigenes between samples L3 (under light condition) and D3 (under dark condition).
Comparing the expression of unigenes between samples L2 (under light conditions) and D2 (under dark conditions), we found that a total of 2,425 and 2,542 unigenes were up- and down-regulated after shading, respectively (Additional file 11: Figure S7A and S7C).
The sample arm collects the backscattered light from the sample and the light reflected from the phase reference glass plate.
There was no relationship between the two variables, suggesting that the duration of light preceding blood sampling, and the variable light exposure relative to the active phase in jet-lagged hamsters, was unlikely to impact cortisol concentrations.
For a better alignment between the video camera, the sample and the light and also to avoid vibrations, all the visualization components and the test chamber were fixed to an optical table (Vision IsoStation, Newport).
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