Sentence examples for difference in editing from inspiring English sources

We therefore conclude that the variation of results across individuals is significantly lower than the difference in editing efficiency between different sites (F-ratio 41.8 by ANOVA analysis; p-value 1.1E-28 1.1E-28

ANOVA analysis resulted in F-ratio 68.25 (p = 4.9E-40 4.9E-40strating that the demonstrating edithat efficiency among various sithe in the same Alu repeat is an ordifferenceninudeditingr than variability in efficiencyficiency of specific sites amongs indivarious.

The highest difference observed between methods was a 10.8 % difference in editing, whereas the lowest difference observed was 0.8%%.

In other words, we wanted to see if there was a significant difference in editing between bulges or double-stranded regions (the duplex) as would be expected from the properties of Adar, if it discriminated against bulges.

Importantly, only 728 A-to-G modifications were found in the coding regions of human using this algorithm (Porath et al., 2014), even though a much larger RNA-seq dataset was used (∼5 billion reads of Illumina Human BodyMap 2.0), thus supporting the dramatic difference in editing between squid and other organisms.

One complicating twist in the tale is that the offending article has appeared twice in the Sunday Express - on January 4 this year and on April 6 last year - under a different headline and with some differences in editing.

It was previously noted that differential editing of ND7 mRNAs could lead to diverse ORFs and dramatic differences in editing correlated with the developmental stage of the parasite [6].

Recent studies indicated that editing levels can increase or decrease with a constant (or not significantly changed) protein expression of ADARs [39] [40], consistent with the opinion of Jacobs and colleagues that the differences in editing patterns may not be mediated solely by ADAR expression levels [41].

We demonstrate that there are no significant differences in editing levels between RNA editing targets at any age in rat cerebral cortex.

In the one experiment using ssODNs where we separated F1's laid on the first and second day (experiment 2, Table 1), we did not note a difference in edit frequency between the two egg-laying periods (data not shown).

These settings recovered up to 200 sub-optimal genomic hits, allowing us to stringently filter reads derived from repetitive regions of the genome as follows: If the difference in edit distance (1 for each mismatch and 2 for each indel) between a read's best alignment and its second-best alignment was within 3, the read was discarded.