Exact(5)
Seven independent fusions to RsaA, the S-layer protein, were localized to a single focus at the cell pole (Table 1).
In addition, significant activity was identified in medial and lateral regions of the frontal pole (Table 2).
Moreover, as expected, these cells did not reverse direction, and RomRD53N-GFP did not relocalize from pole to pole (Table I).
The output-GFP protein localized in a bipolar, asymmetric pattern, with 88% of the cells having a large cluster at the lagging pole and 12% having a large cluster at the leading pole (Table I).
But these cells displayed a 1.5-fold higher reversal frequency than cells synthesizing RomR-GFP (cf. SA2058 in Table I), and all reversals were accompanied by relocation of the large RomR cluster from the old to the new lagging pole (Table I).
Similar(55)
However, when assessing the net height of the new growth for each planting type (i.e. the height 9 months after establishment minus the initial height of the cutting above ground), stakes and wands had greater net new height growth (P = 0.034) than poles (Table 3).
DnaK, a protein chaperone, was found concentrated at both cell poles (Table 1).
Single cells of SA2070 did not reverse direction, and RomR-GFP did not relocate between poles (Table I).
In contrast to cells synthesizing RomR-GFP, cells synthesizing RomRD53N-GFP did not reverse direction, and RomRD53N-GFP did not relocate between poles (Table I).
When contrasting word (HA, LA, and NA) with NW stimuli, brain regions activated by word stimuli (all Ps < 0.01) included the left posterior cingulate gyrus, bilateral precuneus, bilateral superior lateral occipital cortex, left superior frontal gyrus, bilateral middle frontal gyrus, and right frontal poles (Table 3, Fig. 3).
Based on the previous study on patient preferences [12] using the same 26 therapy characteristics and a following principal components analysis (PCA) including varimax rotation, six characteristics were selected and described by a positive and a negative pole (see Table 3).
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