Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(9)
5% input and bound fractions were analyzed by immunoblotting with anti-GFP antibody (upper panel).
5% input and bound fractions were analyzed by immunoblotting with anti-GFP and anti-HA antibodies.
5% input and bound fractions were analyzed by immunoblotting with anti-HA (upper panel) and anti-GFP (lower panel) antibodies.
5% input and bound fractions were analyzed by immunoblotting with anti-GFP antibody (upper panel) and CBB staining (lower panel).
Both the starting material (input) and bound fractions were analyzed by WB probed with streptavidin-HRP (Life Technologies/Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA, USA) followed by ECL as above.
5% input and bound fractions were analyzed by immunoblotting with anti-GFP antibody (upper panel) and coomassie brilliant blue (CBB) staining (lower panel).
Similar(51)
To ascertain that HF-Doa1 binds to MBP-Wss1 all bound fractions were additionally analyzed by western blotting with α-His6 antibodies (panel B ). (C ) Interaction of Wss1 with preformed Cdc48 complexes confirms ternary 1 1 1 Wss1/Doa1/complexomplex.
The input (I) and bound (B) fractions were analyzed by western blotting.
Input, unbound, and bound fractions were separated by SDS-PAGE, transferred to nitrocellulose membranes, and analyzed by phosphorimaging and immunoblotting with anti-His antibody (Sigma).
Their capacity to bind preformed SUMO chains was analyzed by western blotting with α-SUMO (all fractions were analyzed at the same dilution).
Sample fractions were analyzed on 12 % SDS-PAGE.
More suggestions(15)
bound fractions were diluted
bound fractions were quantified
bound regions were analyzed
bound fractions were determined
bound fractions were composed
bound ligands were analyzed
bound fractions were eluted
bound fractions were amplified
bound fractions were separated
bound fractions were released
bound complexes were analyzed
bound fractions were detected
bound fractions were enriched
bound fractions were run
bound fractions were resolved
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