Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(1)
Quantitative RT-PCR analysis confirmed the expression differences for seven genes, that is, serpine peptidase inhibitor clade E, DUSP1, tribbles homologue 1, S100 calcium-binding protein A10, annexin A1, guanine nucleotide-binding protein G olf) subunit alpha and retinol dehydrogenase 12, with similar modulation patterns for mRNA expression comparing microarray with qRT-PCR analyses.
Similar(59)
has a modulation pattern nearly equal to that at the underground station Sakashita as (3) The modulation pattern for cannot be obtained because of the lack of its explicit form in Fig. 20(c)., however, can be clearly observed at some stations in some times together with as shown in Fig. 21.
We defined the co-modulation patterns for each gene pair as the M-length vectors of β values and p-values for M modulator genes.
Similar modulation patterns were found for the expression of the eight genes comparing microarray analyses with qRT-PCR (Supplementary Figure 1).
The modulation pattern of is shown in Fig. 20(c).
This also suggests that the effective coherence length for the electronic waves along the Ge dimer rows is around twice the distance where we observe the LDOS modulation patterns, i.e., up to 50 nm for the lower energies.
Yet, some displayed quite interesting modulation patterns.
Although the modulation pattern is the same for all the cycles studied, the contributions to the amplitude of modulation as a function of the phase of solar activity vary greatly from one cycle to another.
Accordingly, we may expect that, for each specific modulation pattern, a significant number of evolutionarily allowed mutational paths exist.
For instance, NA8 melanoma cells HLA-A*0201+ HLA-A*0201+played a divergenTAA−A modisplayedpattern as comparedivergentand D10.
We further grouped all the gene pairs based on their co-modulation patterns (significance of candidate modulators for each gene pair) so that gene pairs significantly modulated by the same set of modulators were grouped.
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