Exact(3)
The obstacles to high quality mapping were mainly differences in agreement between coders due to both structural and content factors in SNOMED CT and ICD-10/KSH97-P ICD-10/KSH97-P ICD-10/KSH97-P
Obstacles to high quality mapping were mainly a lack of agreement by the coders due to structural and content factors in SNOMED CT and in the current ICD-10 version.
Cotton genetic maps so far used in QTL mapping were mainly constructed using non-SNP markers, mostly SSR markers, although a genetic map with 1104 markers, including 414 SNP markers, has recently been used in mapping of QTL resistant to Verticillum wilt (Fang et al. 2014) and a map with only SNP markers (346 in total) has been constructed (Byers et al. 2012).
Similar(57)
Thus, due to limitations of time and resources, the mapping was mainly performed based on abstracts of papers.
These four maps were mainly based on microsatellites, Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphisms (RFLPs) and protein polymorphisms.
Earlier maps used RFLP or AFLP markers, while the later maps were mainly based on SSR markers.
Other maps were mainly based on anonymous dominant AFLP, RAPD, RFLP and DArT markers [ 26, 28, 33].
The connectivity maps were mainly distributed in the bilateral insular cortex, secondary somatosensory cortex (subregions OP1 4), and inferior parietal cortex for the three stimulation conditions (i.e., L-D, M-P, and M-D).
These low density maps were mainly based on isozymes [ 15, 16], RAPD (randomly amplified polymorphic DNA), RFLP (restriction fragment length polymorphism), AFLP (amplified fragment length polymorphism) and SRAP (sequence related amplified polymorphism) markers, and only a limited number of SSR (simple sequence repeat) markers [ 17- 19].
Twenty years ago, the map was mainly covered in red, the traditional colour of social democracy.
Potential ranking used in the potential map was mainly based on effective thermal conductivities and subsurface temperatures.
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