Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(2)
In the Pond sample, which was known a priori to contain parental and offspring individuals, we performed parentage assignment using genotypic data for 10 microsatellite loci.
We found 1,814 SNPs (0.044% of evaluated genic sites) among 718 unigenes in the sampled nine-spined sticklebacks (934 unique SNPs in the marine sample, 642 unique SNPs in the pond sample, and 238 SNPs shared in common).
Similar(58)
In total, 44 freshwater pond samples, 18 shrimp pond samples, 18 rice paddy water samples, and 23 tidal channel samples were collected (Table 2).
All shrimp pond samples are Na Cl type and oversaturated in dolomite and calcite.
The water samples contaminated with the suspected pesticides were above the acceptable limit except for the fish pond samples of Sahabatpur and Dubaria union.
Furthermore, histograms and normality tests suggest that all freshwater pond samples can be treated as a single population, which we do for simplicity.
Drinking water sources also often have unsafe As levels, with 83% of tubewell and 43% of freshwater pond samples having >10 μg As/L.
For example, dry season tidal channel water is compositionally similar to shrimp pond samples (Fig. 7), indicating that shrimp farmers draw water from the tidal channels for their shrimp ponds.
Freshwater pond samples in May have significantly higher SpC, As, Na, S, and DOC than in October, but no significant differences are observed for pH or P (Table 2).
Only DOC (Fig. 5d) and Mn show significantly different concentrations between dry season tidal channel and shrimp pond samples, and those differences can be attributed to nonconservative behavior (redox cycling or sorption).
Resultant FC count (colony-forming unit [cfu]) lower and upper detection ranges were: 1 100 cfu/100 mL for tube well samples, 1 40,000 cfu/100 mL for open pond samples, 1 20,000 cfu/100 mL for SDW, and 34 67,200 cfu/2 hands for HR samples.
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