Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(3)
The simplicity of the technology described in this manuscript should make it applicable in other laboratories.
This manuscript should make an important contribution to the field if the authors address the few concerns raised below: 1) The authors have quantified their experiments by counting the number of cells that display or not the analyzed phenotype.
This is a unique effort but the manuscript should make more reference to existing pathway based community annotation efforts e.g.: wikipathways and/or open science initiatives such as those promoted by community interaction leaders such as Andrew Su.
Similar(57)
Finally, for readability, the authors should make the manuscript and the figure captions more self-contained.
We hope the new version of the manuscript, especially the new Abstract and Introduction, should make this clearer.
The manuscript should be made more self-sufficient.
However, the authors should make this clear throughout the manuscript (and in the Abstract).
The authors should make this clarification in the revised manuscript.
The revised manuscript should unequivocally describe the amount of detail in the actual scene employed in the experiments and ideally should make each of the figures consistent with this (or at minimum should include a caveat in the figure caption).
She should make converts.
We should make videos".
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