Suggestions(1)
Exact(1)
8) The terminology used to describe mutations in the discussion of Figures 5 and 6 is problematic.
Similar(58)
As it was pointed out in the discussion of Figure 3, variations of the droplet shape may explain the differences between the theoretical solution and the experimental results visible in Figure 4A.
A similar issue arises in the discussion of Figure 3.
Also in the discussion of Figure 7A there is no mention of the low ufDD (black lines).
For any given scenario of interest, we simulated the introduction of 10 index cases at random into a population of size 10000, and operationally defined "containment" to occur whenever the final size of the epidemic was less than 500 cases within 250 days (we showed, in the discussion of Figure 5A below, that in nearly all cases, the 250-day window differs very little from a 1000-day window).
In light of the discussion of Figure 1 (see paragraph above) we interpret the observed decrease in the ESE amplitude in the ascorbate- vs dithionite-reduced samples as a result of an enhancement of the cluster relaxation induced by magnetic interaction with oxidized heme bL present in the ascorbate-reduced samples.
This observation is introduced in the main text during the discussion of Figure 8. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.09183.016 Blotting for total Lyn protein in the presence and absence of IFN-γ revealed that Lyn expression was substantially increased by priming and that Lyn expression correlated with the ability of 3-IB-PP1 to induce Erk signaling.
This indicates some unmodelled contributions from the ring current (see the discussion of Figure two in Olsen 2002).
The important contribution of (tilde {v}_{3}^{0}) to the vertical component is associated with the well-known larger impact of externally induced fields on Z (see for instance the discussion of Figure ten in Hulot et al. 2007).
Fourth, we have highlighted the two important features of cerebellar function revealed by our paper as shading in Figure 1, and we have changed the discussion of Figure 1 to foreshadow where we are going.
An example of this more general kind of convention is given below in the discussion of the Figure 3.1 example.
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