A second way to argue that the above theoretical observations are robust is to find supporting empirical evidence.
These observations are robust to phylogenetic comparison These results are consistent with other studies that suggest that a flower size vs number trade-off is common in angiosperms [7].aximum fruit production per tree, in contrast to flower production, did not scale negatively with flower size.
The fact that these almost identical results were seen in two different statistical analyses suggests that these observations are robust.
Despite these limitations, we believe that our observations are robust and if at all, possibly underestimate the role of CCL2 in driving FC migration.
These observations are robust with respect to the approach used to estimate gene expression levels and – importantly – are not explained by unequal rates of degradation occurring at different distances from the 3′ poly-A tail.
These observations are robust to different normalization approaches, to the inclusion of RIN as a covariate in our linear model, and to fitting slopes using RIN instead of time-points.
However, we all know the unpredictable nature of science and the curve balls it can throw" (See more at: http://blog.f1000research.com/2013/09/12/the-observation-article-recording-phenomena-in-scientific-research/ sthash.QP2xbUJj.dpuf ) Our observations are robust and repeatable.
