Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(4)
The mutant is assumed to compete with the original autocatalyst.
The autocatalyst undergoes a mutation and the resulting mutant is assumed to compete with the original autocatalyst.
The expected fitness of the resulting double mutant is assumed to be F abexpected = F a × F b.
The position of the selected mutant is assumed to be known, as is the genetic distance between the j1th and j2th SNP, { r j1 j2, 1 ≤ j1, j2 ≤ m}.
Similar(54)
A reduction in apparent molecular mass for a particular point mutant was assumed to mean that this asparagine residue would normally be N-glycosylated in HEK cells.
Also, a very large population will contain a larger percentage of mutants; that is, irreversible mutations act like a force of selection, even though here the mutants are assumed to have no selective advantage.
In the current setting, X4 and R5 mutants are assumed to arise with equal probability irrespective of the composition of the viral load due to the close genetic neighbourhood of these viral subtypes [ 33, 34] (for further discussion cf. Additional file 1, Figure S1).
To make this a model of deteriorating mutants, it is assumed that f t ≥ f t+1 for t ≥ 1.
It is straightforward to show that these analytical results still hold, if the mutant mating modifier A1 is assumed to be dominant over the wild type A2.
In a homotypic encounter for the mutant mating modifier allele A1 it is assumed that the probability of fusion of the gametes is the same for the two homotypic associations at the object locus B, i.e. This is a reasonable assumption in view of the fact that changes in genetic coherence show primarily in alterations of the fusion probabilities for heterotypic combinations at the object locus.
This has been interpreted as evidence against the mFRTA because it is assumed that these mutants suffer from significantly elevated oxidative damage to their mitochondria.
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