Sentence examples for paw 1 from inspiring English sources

The inflammation was quantified by measuring the volume displaced by the paw 1, 2, 3 and 4 h after carrageenan injection.

Arthritis severity was recorded for individual paws using the following scoring system: 0 = normal paw, 1 = mild oedema and/or erythema of the joint or individual digits; 2 = moderate oedema and erythema involving the entire paw, 3 = pronounced oedema and erythema accompanied with joint rigidity.

In the following days, the arthritis clinical score was evaluated by examining the paws and using a 4-point scale: 0, normal paw; 1, minimal swelling or redness; 2, redness and swelling involving the entire forepaw; 3, redness and swelling involving the entire limp; 4, joint deformity or ankylosis or both.

TRAP staining was scored semi-quantitatively (on a scale from 0 to 4): 0, no osteoclasts per paw; 1, 1 to 10 osteoclasts per paw; 2, 11 to 20 osteoclasts per paw; 3, 21 to 50 osteoclasts per paw; and 4, more than 50 osteoclasts per paw.

The mice were scored in a blinded manner (0 12) twice weekly for 3 weeks for signs of arthritis in each paw according to the following scale: 0 = no swelling or redness/normal paw; 1 = swelling and/or redness in one digit; 2 = swelling and/or redness in two or more digits; and 3 = entire paw is swollen or red.

The development of arthritis was evaluated by using a scoring system based on a scale from 0 to 4 for each of four paws, as described elsewhere [ 22]: 0 = normal paw; 1 = swelling of individual digits; 2 = moderate swelling and redness of ankle or wrist joints; 3 = swelling and redness of at least two joints; and 4 = swelling of the whole paw.

Arthritis was assessed daily, and inflammation was scored from grade 0 to grade 4 for each paw [ 13, 36, 37].

Mr. He Tha's younger two children — Tuesday Paw, 12, and Eh Dee Na Poe, 7 — attend the community school.

The projected augmented wave (PAW) method[25, 26] with a plane wave basis set was used.

Swing duration of the other three paws remained at sham level (Fig. 4c), while their stance duration was significantly higher than CF (F 3,33) = 12.5, p < 0.0001 for factor paw; F 3,33) = 3.8, p = 0.0194 for interaction between paw and treatment; significant difference between CF and all other paws within 6-OHDA; Fig. 4d).

IH showed an increase in print area (F 3,33) = 4.6, p < 0.0088 for factor paw; F 3,33) = 5.7, p = 0.0028 for interaction between paw and treatment, significant difference between IH and all other paws within 6-OHDA; Fig. 4e), which also correlated significantly with dopaminergic lesion severity (R = 0.65, p = 0.0168; Fig. 4f).