Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(1)
Both methods revealed an increased presence of acidic vesicles organelles and autophagosomes in cells treated with both drugs in isolation, when compared with untreated cells.
Similar(59)
As shown in Fig. 3, linear regression analysis of these PICP concentrations obtained by both methods revealed a significant relationship (R2 = 0.9914).
Both methods revealed a similar expression pattern for the protein in the cell lines (data not shown).
While both methods revealed a common set of 376 transcripts whose expression was altered by PHA-stimulation, Tempus™-prepared specimens revealed an additional 189 up-regulated transcripts that were not detected in PAXgene™-prepared specimens, many of which fall into the category of immune response or cellular proliferation transcripts.
Both methods revealed a bias towards disgusting content, indicating that disgust bias operates both through the non-random transformation of content as it is remembered and reconstructed, and also the non-random selection of content as it is chosen and replicated.
Comparison of both methods reveals an acceptable resemblance in results, with lower counts of maximum 10%.
A comparison between both methods revealed only a 15.3% correlation (Pearson p = 0.0424).
Both methods revealed that while a significant number of mutant ZCL2897-positive cells also express Atilla or MSNF9 (yellow signal, supplementary material Fig. S3C,D,F; white arrowheads in supplementary material Fig. S3G–R'), a number of ZCL2897 hi cells do not express either lamellocyte marker (supplementary material Fig. S3G–R', white arrows).
The regression analyses (see methods) revealed an association between the cytochrome P450 (CYP)19A1 gene and risk for FL (p = 6.3×10−3).
The comparison of both methods revealed that carbon nanotubes behave rather as an anisotropic material.
A comparison of both methods revealed that the diagnosis "no periodontitis" corresponded in 17 cases and "periodontitis" in 42 cases (53%).
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