The 3ADON mean mass for DDGS with transformed RW2802 was significantly higher than that for DDGS with Ethanol Red or untransformed RW2802 (P < 0.05) (Table 3).
When we calculated the mean mass for all 13 mice in the SINCP- neu group and compared it with the value of the SINCP-βgal group, the difference was significant (0.25 vs 1.02 g; P = 0.0001) (Fig. 1a).
The mean mass for the combined PS and WMS salivary pellicles was 1,215 ± 289 ng cm−2 (12 nm ± 3 nm thick) and this was slightly higher on the HA sensor than on the silica sensor at 1,103 ± 139 ng cm−2 (11 nm ± 1 nm thick) but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.11).
At each generation, the mean masses of each sex for each population and the mean mass of the largest quartile of flies for each sex and population were used as data, giving an n = 5 for each selection group.
However, these mean metabolic rates per gram conceal a host of subtleties, as eukaryotic cells are, on average, much larger than prokaryotes, with a mean mass of 40,100 × 10-12 g for eukaryotes versus 2.6 × 10-12 g for prokaryotes.
Although the mean mass estimates for the distributions were often similar, the simulated distributions from GC/MS data did not match the orbital trap data.
The mean mass error for annotated mass spectral features was 2.4 ppm (σ = 2.1 ppm, median = 2.5 ppm); the mean percent error for isotopomer abundances (including, first, second, and third isotopomer abundance errors) was 2.9% (σ = 2.9%, median = 1.7%).
For the simplest NoRIMod9 accounting, the mean mass and energy flows for the total biomass supplied to a bioenergy plant (i.e., the bioenergy plant catchment), can be used as input for the designated life cycle software (e.g., GaBi, SimaPro, Open LCA 6, similar to conventional life cycle approaches (i.e., taking the mean).
Model same as for mean mass, except that log initial nest mass) was included as a covariate, to adjust for any variation in initial nest size.
In this approach, the conservation equations for mean mass, momentum, and energy conservation are solved by a FV method while a particle algorithm is employed to solve the fluctuating velocity-turbulence frequency-compositions joint PDF transport equation.
Mean deposited mass for all four airflows tested per vacuum decreased as vacuum rate was increased: mean deposition was 3.79, 2.75, 1.56 and 1.09 μg/cm2 at vacuum rates of 5, 10, 50 and 100 ml/min/well respectively.
