Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(60)
To perform comparative genomic hybridization (CGH), genomic DNA from cy3-labeled mutant mop1 1 sample was compared with a cy5-labeled wild type mop1 1 sample.
Each digested sample was compared alongside with its not-digested cognate control.
The absorbance of the sample was compared to the absorbance of the photocatalyst sol.
The best sample was compared to the Pt and to the reported ruthenium selenium catalyst.
The propagation of the THz pulse through the sample was compared with a theoretical model.
Each sample was compared with P-FePc-py-CNT in a hybrid H2/O2 fuel cell.
Each sample was compared with the corresponding interval to identify regions that showed non-random variation frequencies (Figure 2A).
Also, the X-ray diffractogram of the sample was compared with the ASTM data of ZnO and ZnS due to the presence of oxygen as seen from EDX.
Each sample was compared to the standard sample B-190 of the same run.
To diagnose symbiont identity, the DGGE fingerprint for each sample was compared to ITS2 standards of known nucleotide sequences.
Each tumor sample was compared to a healthy control sample on a two channel oligonucleotide-based platform.
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