Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(46)
As shown in Figure S3, in both HepG2 and Hepa1-6 cells macroH2A1.1 induced a decrease (~60 and 50%, respectively) in UFA content when compared with their respective untreated control cells, while macroH2A1.2 only slightly decreased the levels of UFA in HepG2 but increased them of about two fold in Hepa1-6 cells.
Moreover, the surface energy of treated sample varied comparing to the respective untreated samples.
For epidermal thickness, group means were corrected for the respective untreated, contralateral skin because of an existing systematic difference in overall epidermal thickness between the groups.
To calculate the alterations in the cell cycle distribution, the respective untreated controls were subtracted from the samples.
On the contrary, TQ treated M059J cells showed significant DNA damage unlike TQ treated M059K cells that displayed minimal increase when compared to respective untreated control cells at 25 µM TQ (Figure 3B).
When MB-435 and PC-3 cells were treated with 5-Aza-dC, there were significant increases in the PHD3 mRNA expression compared to their respective untreated controls (Figure 2).
Similar(14)
The amounts of cyclin D1 and of p27KIP1 remained nearly unchanged respective to untreated cells.
On the other hand, we could not detect changes in the levels of phosphorylated form of JNK respective to untreated cells.
However, it induced a clear decrease of the level of the phosphorylated form of p46 JNK respective to untreated cells (two-fold decrease).
Consistently with the cytotoxicity results (Table 1), cells treated with 7 μM PE5 or 1 μM onconase for 72 h (which correspond to the IC50 values described in Table 1) decreased the proliferation to around 50% respective to untreated cells.
On the other hand, treatment with onconase decreases three-fold the concentration of XIAP respective to untreated cells whereas it does not change the level of the phosphorylated form of JNK.
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