Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(10)
Phylogenetic relationships were reconstructed for both data sets using Bayesian analyses and maximum likelihood (ML) searches (Figure 1).
All significant differentially expressed genes were identified in both data sets using LIMMA (Array) and EdgeR (RNA-Seq) with a FC > 2 and a FDR < 0.05.
We were able to achieve high sensitivity (on a par with the manual annotator) on both data sets using our proposed sampling and cost-sensitive methods.
Pearson's correlation coefficients were calculated in Microsoft Excel and P=0.001 levels of significance were calculated for both data sets using the formula: R=(U−1)/(U+1), where, Z 0.001)=3.09, N=54, or N=111.
jModeltest (Posada 2008) was used to find the best substitution model and associated parameters for phylogenetic analysis in both data sets using the Akaike (Hirotugu 1974) and Bayesian (Schwarz 1978) information criteria.
However, after combining and analyzing both data sets using the two different methods, only 722 (14.8%) of genes in the genome were found to be diurnally regulated or light inducible, and 448 genes (9.2%) could be classified as circadian controlled.
Similar(50)
On both data sets used in this study, TMMTOP_RA achieves better performance when multiple sequence mode is used as input.
Both data sets used a pool of normal samples as a common baseline sample, respectively derived from human and dog samples (see Methods).
Tree reconstruction for both data sets used the CAT profile mixture model with four discrete gamma categories and the exchange rates fixed by the LG model.
In both data sets, use of moderately informative variance priors constructed from the pair wise meta-analysis data yielded the best model fit and narrower credible intervals.
We aligned both opsin data sets using the E-INS-i strategy of the multiple alignment program MAFFT v6.0 [ 108] and then chose an appropriate model of nucleotide substitution via the program jModelTest v0.1.1 [ 109].
More suggestions(1)
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