Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(4)
For the first example, P. elegans, the mean distance within species was 5.296% (0.530 patristic distances).
The mean distance within the L. provocax clade was 0.3%.
Two vectors, each containing 500 bootstrap estimates of the mean distance within each group, were concatenated to form a 1000 element vector.
The mean distance within genomes is larger for protist, plant, and human chromosomes, and smaller for archaea, bacteria, and yeast, for any window size.
Similar(56)
The mean distances within networks are less than 1.5% (minimum 0.126%), while inter-network distances are above 4.3%, with a maximum of 32.0% (between Network 4 and Network 7).
Estimates of evolutionary mean distances within types were relatively small (0.004-0.039) (Table 2), emphasising the low value of the sequences of the A type with respect to those of E and F types.
The majority (97%) of mean distance values within species were less than 2%, though the scale of divergence appears to vary extensively between species: all 10 specimens of Goneplax rhomboides (Linnaeus, 1758) (Brachyura: Goneplacidae) share the same haplotype, and Cherax preissii (Erichson, 1846) (Astacidea: Parastacidae) exhibited the highest mean intraspecific value of 2.61±0.193 K2P distance.
Overall, the mean distance walked within six minutes was 618 ± 79 meters.
The average proportion of difference in sequences within species was 0.0146±0.0193 (mean±SD), whereas mean distance between species within a genus was over an order of magnitude larger, 0.345±0.100.
The obtained values for the mean distance to material within the sponge calculated from 2-D and 3-D data of the whole tomogram differ significantly: 12.5 μm for 3-D and 17.6 μm for 2-D analysis.
For each of these properties, we calculated for each gene the mean distance for mutations within a cluster and mutations outside of the cluster, and then tested for a non-zero mean distance using a paired t-test.
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