Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(6)
Average blood methanol concentrations at 30 min postexposure were 5, 11, and 35 μg/ml across all four toxicokinetic studies in the 200, 600 and 1800 ppm groups, respectively.
Survival values for mice at three weeks were 99, 94, 74 and 76% for the 200, 400, 900 and 1800 ppm groups, respectively.
The ratio of total fat to total carbohydrate increased by 103% and 134% for the 500 and 1000 ppm groups, respectively (p < 0.01) (figure 2h).
Analysis of rat mammary glands indicated an average concentration of 1.4 ± 0.5 μM and 1.8 ± 0.3 μM for the auraptene 200 and 500 ppm groups respectively (means ± S.E).
Analysis of rat mammary tissue extract by HPLC with fluorescence detection indicated an average concentration (means ± S.E). of 1.4 ± 0.5 μM and 1.8 ± 0.3 μM in the normal mammary glands of the auraptene 200 ppm and 500 ppm groups, respectively.
The apparent biological half-time of cadmium in monkeys at autopsied stage was calculated to be 0.66, 6.4, 5.2, and 22.4 years for the 300, 30, 3, and 0 ppm groups, respectively.
Similar(54)
The tumor burden (total tumor weights per rat and average tumor weight per rat in grams) was 6.62 ± 1.93 and 2.36 ± 0.77 in the MNU control; 6.52 ± 1.49 and 2.94 ± 0.79 in the MNU/Auraptene 200 ppm group; and 6.50 ± 2.10 and 1.79 ± 0.54 in the MNU/Auraptene 500 ppm group, respectively.
The Pearson correlations between pre- and postexposure PB MN-RET were 0.60, 0.63, 0.54, and 0.38 for the 0-, 10-,100-ppmd 100-ppm groups, respectively.
Mouse pulmonary arsenic was elevated, that is, 16.3-, 21.8-, 76.1-, and 229-fold in the 0.05, 0.25, 1.0, and 85 ppm treatment groups, respectively.
However, muscle fiber density was still reduced to 85.7%, 80.3%, and 73.8% of control for the 0.8, 2, and 5 ppm embryonic-only exposure groups, respectively, even after 16 weeks of development.
Survival is 21, 41, 45, 76, 70 and 64% for the negative control, 200, 400, 900, 1800 ppm and matched control groups, respectively.
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