Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(5)
The mean liver weights of the 2 or 3% AAFA™ fed/CPT-11 treated mice were not significantly different from the mean liver weights of the mice that were not treated with CPT-11.
In the present study, the mean liver weights of mice in dietary feeding of troglitazone and bezafibrate were significantly increased.
The mean liver weights of mice in groups 3 (P < 0.05) and 4 (P < 0.01) were significantly greater than that of group 1.
Hepatic metastasis in NM-supplemented mice was reduced by 55% (p = 0.006) compared to the control group, based on mean liver weights of the groups.
Mean liver weights were significantly increased in BDL rats compared to the sham-operated controls (group 1: sham 8.1 g, BDL 14.1 g; group 2: sham 9.0 g, BDL 19.4 g; group 3: sham 10.3 g, BDL 19.3 g).
Similar(55)
Mean liver weight was statistically higher in type B infected mice than in A1a infected mice in round 1 and was statistically higher in type B infected mice than A1b infected mice in round 2. No other statistical differences in mean liver weight by group or round were detected.
Mean liver weight for the rats was about 9 g.
The mean liver weight was significantly higher in the fenofibrate group compared to controls (9.64 ± 0.85 g and 6.98 ± 0.47 g, respectively, P = 0.0001).
In dogs (90 days; 1000 9000 ppm BPA in the diet), the only toxic effect observed was an increase in mean liver weight in the high-dose group (US EPA, 1984a).
Specifically, the mean body weight of h PPARα mice was 14% less and 8.5% less than m PPARα and Pparα-null mice, respectively, and the mean liver weight of h PPARα mice was 11% less than Pparα -null mice; the liver/body weight ratio of Pparα-null mice was 11% higher than in m PPARα mice.
The mean relative liver weights (LW/BW ratio) of acute PCM-treated animals (negative control) showed significant increase compared to the control normal group (P < 0.05).
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