In a recent paper, Jauernig (2008) presents a markedly different interpretation, in part in an attempt to indicate that Kant's criticisms in the Critique are often intended to undermine various Leibnizian positions that Leibniz himself did not embrace.
We'll explore that mistaken interpretation in part 2.
Although one possible interpretation of this phenotype is that overexpression of PCN promoted adaxialization of the stem affecting phloem fiber development, we do not favor this interpretation, in part because phloem fibers initiate in an appropriate position, and simply fail to properly complete differentiation.
We have now de-emphasized the internal model interpretation in part by moving it to the Discussion as suggested above.
The lack of knowledge regarding AChE interpretation may in part be explained by a lack of precise values of AChE informing decisions rules in OP poisoning management [ 2- 6].
However, this interpretation is in part challenged by the unique phenotypes observed in either Mel18 or Bmi-1 knockout mice, which is suggestive of different functions for Mel18 and Bmi-1.
We highlight the challenges both in alteration detection and genotype phenotype interpretation caused in part by the heterogeneity of GALNS alterations and provide recommendations for molecular testing of GALNS.
At t = 1, we assume that the environmental variables are not subject to such direct phenotypic influences, so that at t = 1 the latent environment variables have their standard interpretation, which in part is based on their specification as uncorrelated.
However, that interpretation rests, in part, on results of studies in isolated rat α-cells (2), which are debated (1), and on the evidence that the islet microcirculation flows from β-cells to α-cells to δ-cells (4), which is also debated (19).
Note of interpretation: Results in part (a) suggest that the BMD measurement (mg/cm) for a subject at time t (denoted by BMD t ) can be represented by the equation: BMD t = 944 – 3.7*Year – 9.2* sPINP t, where "Year" is 0, 1, 2,..., and sPINP t is the measurement of sPINP at time t for the subject.
Note of interpretation: Results in part (a) suggest that the BMD measurement (mg/cm) for a subject at time t (denoted by BMD t ) can be represented by the equation: BMD t = 943 – 3.5*Year – 9.2* sPINP0, where "Year" is 0, 1, 2,..., and sPINP0 is the measurement of sPINP at baseline for the subject.
