Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(5)
The mean weight per mouse in each group was the same.
The mean weight per plant was significantly reduced from 98 mg in control plants to 81, 64 and 61 mg in TCDD-exposed plants at indicated concentrations, respectively (Fig. 4a).
Each question was given equal weight; all questions within a subdomain contributed X% to the score of a domain, where X was the mean weight per subdomain given by an expert panel.
We used the following fertility end points: mating index (number of mated females ÷ number of females cohabited with males × 100), fertility index (number of pregnant females ÷ number of mated females × 100), litter size, mean weight per neonate, sex ratio at birth, and percentage of postimplantation loss (number of embryonic scars ÷ number of embryonic buttons and scars × 100).
In the linear piecewise model, the association strengthened between birth and age 20 years (P = 0.006 for genotype-by-age interaction) at a rate of 0.005 SDS per C-allele per year (95% CI: 0.001 0.008), so that at age 20 years there was a 0.13 SDS increase in mean weight per C-allele (95% CI: 0.06 0.19) (Table 3).
Similar(55)
HIV seropositive children had a significantly (p < 0.001) lower mean weight gain per kilogram per day (2.4 g/kg/day, 95% CI = 0.7-4.1 0.7-4.1y) than HIV seroneg/kg/dayubjecthan7.0 g/kg/day, 95% CI = 5.8-8.2 g/kg/day).
Except for enclosures with 5 fish m−3, mean weight gain per fish and week decreased with fish abundance and was higher in high resource treatments compared to low resource treatments with the same fish abundance (Fig. 5).
The mean weight gain per day at the rearing farms was set as the dependent variable.
The mean weight increase per week was 0.84 kg (SD = 0.56).
The primary outcome was mean weight gain per day between 14 days and 4 months (112 days) of age.
It was evaluated weight of bunches per plant (WBP), the number of bunches per plant (NBP) and the mean weight of bunches per plant (MWB) for two crop years (2010 and 2011).
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