Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(2)
We labeled the groups as follows: The LETO in fostering group was named LdLp (LETO dam- LETO pups); the OLETF in fostering group was accordingly named OdOp, the LETO dam- OLETF pups group was named LdOp and the OLETF dam- LETO pups group was named OdLp.
In the preterm pups (group 2), increased numbers of positive nuclei were found, but they were limited to the crypt compartment and not reach statistical significance in comparison to the control group.
Similar(58)
For analysis, a 2-way ANOVAs (using maternal rearing group and pup group) were used.
A significant increase was observed in the hyper pup group compared to control levels, whereas a significant decrease was observed in the hypo pup group compared to control levels.
The hypo++ pup group received the same doses of THs in the i.p. injection as the hypo+, but registered higher levels of circulating T4 (levels similar to the hyperthyroid pup group).
The Zipf's relation was compared among pup groups and adults.
When using a 2-way ANOVA to examine the overall effect of neglectful versus nurturing mothers when raising pups from all three pup groups, adult weight of female offspring raised by neglectful mothers was significantly lower relative to those raised by nurturing dams (Fig. 4A) (F 1,120) = 7.5, p = 0.007).
The hypo+ and hypo++ pup groups also showed a significant increase in serum T4 compared to control.
Milk from group 3 control dams was spiked at 0.3 and 1.0 mg/kg and given to pup groups 1 and 2, respectively, via oral gavage.
By P29-P42, there were no significant differences in body weight between SAL-treated Group A and Group B. In addition, post hoc analysis revealed that DEX-treated rat pups in Group B weighed significantly higher than those in DEX-treated rat pups in Group A on P17-P42 (p<0.05), but by P1-P16 there was no body weight difference between groups.
Mild pathological changes scale (b)—were significantly (p<0.01) observed in the intestines of pups from group 2 versus control.
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