Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(2)
Exact(1)
The total number of positive cases where these genes show splicing between two given tissues is 282.
Similar(59)
We carried out 15 pair-wise comparisons among the six tissues to identify both genes with differential isoform usage between any two given tissues and genes with unique isoform usage in a given tissue compared to all others.
4. Comparing exon skipping profiles across tissues, we found that only 10 20% of the events identified show different splicing ratios between any two given tissues, whereas 50 65% of the cataloged events are not present in either or both tissues.
When applied to the tissue transcriptome data from the Mouse Genomes Project from the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, IUTA identified 2,073 genes with differential isoform usage between any two given tissues and 46 genes with tissue-specific isoform usage.
We visualize several branching blends between two given cylinders.
Specifically, we searched for genes whose isoform usage was significantly different in all comparisons between a given tissue and remaining five tissues but non-significant in every comparison that did not involve the given tissue.
Importantly, it is impossible to discern what happened between any two given time points, or whether the infection progressed beyond the organs/tissues selected for analysis.
We focused the analysis on the transcripts showing at least a two-fold difference in expression between the MRL/MpJ mouse and the two control strains in a given tissue.
All three total content variables were highly correlated within a given tissue while significant correlations between tissues were only observed for concB and concK.
Of the 26,989 exon skipping events, between 10,000 20,000 are present in any given tissue.
Fold change was calculated by the formula 2-ΔΔCt, where ΔΔCt is the difference between ΔCt of a gene in a given tissue and the lowest value ΔCt for that gene in any of the three tissue types.
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