Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(4)
Sum of the contigs or scaffolds lengths.
The number of combined contigs was less than the sum of the contigs from the two datasets used for SSR identification, as identical contigs derived from both Rubus species were combined.
Thus, the Germany pool had fewer gaps (from no gaps in SILV assembled clones to 82 gaps in KITL assembled clones) in the sequences (Table 1) and the sum of the contigs from clones for individual genes (one single or two overlaping clones per locus) averaged approximately 240 kb.
The California pool yielded a shorter average insert size and there were more gaps in the contig (up to 100, as in KRT71) (Table 1) with the sum of the contigs from clones for individual genes (one single, two or three overlapping clones per locus) averaging approximately 155 kb.
Similar(56)
The sum of the contig lengths for I-Pae was 5,895,455 nucleotides and the assembly contained 5,683 predicted protein-coding genes.
The sum of the contig lengths for E-Pae was 5,926,327 nucleotides, which is approximately the expected size based on previously sequenced P. syringae genomes, and the assembly contained 5,621 predicted protein-coding genes.
Accordingly, the score of an allele supported by multiple contigs (for example, exons 2 and 3 for class I genes) is the sum of the contig scores.
The sum of the contig or scaffold lengths ranged from 4.1 Mb to 5.2 Mb, which is comparable to genome sizes of previously sequenced strains.
Assembly of the SOLiD™ system reads resulted in 785 to 2,551 contigs per genome (Table 2); the sum of the contig lengths ranged from 2.8 to 3.2 Mb, which is comparable to genome sizes of previously sequenced Listeria genomes (Table 1).
The sum of the wheat contigs per category did not add up to 100% as some contigs were classified into more than one category.
The sum of the chloroplast contigs produced by CLC and Velvet were 146,401 bp and 129,686 bp respectively (Table 1).
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