Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSimilar(60)
Two biological and two technical repeats were performed with null-template control.
Average expression levels of the genes were normalized to the null-template controls.
All reactions were performed in triplicate with null-template controls in which cDNA was absent.
In each of three experimental repeats, all reactions were performed in triplicate with null-template controls in which cDNA was absent.
Left: null promoter DNA template in the presence of NTPs.
No probe-DNA interactions were observed in a control experiment with a DNA template containing a null mutant promoter (Raskin et al., 1993), indicating that the co-localization was due to promoter-specific transcription.
Given our result that basal-cambium samples from the same tree had higher genetic distances on average than other tissue type pairs, we wondered if samples from cambium tissue were more prone to null alleles due to lower template DNA concentrations in the PCRs.
We interpret the short-lived, stochastic interactions to be promoter-specific but non-productive RPc and RPo, because no interactions were observed with templates containing a null promoter sequence (at frame rates of 12.5 Hz, Figure 3B) and similar short-lived interactions were observed in the absence of NTPs (single exponential T 0 ∼0.3 s, Figure 3D).
Both sets of primers were tested for null amplification against Rho 0 derived template [ 9] using the PCR conditions described previously to preclude the possibility of coamplification of numts.
Significance for the prediction is compued as a nominal p-value estimated based on a null distribution for the distance d to the templates generated by randomly resampling nA+nB genes from the N genes 1,000 times (default).
To establish significance at the population level, the proportion of preplay events measured was compared to a null distribution generated by calculating correlations between place cell templates and shuffled sequences from events (see Figure 1B C).> 10.7554/eLife.06063.004 Figure 1.
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