Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(4)
Table 1 Treatments for seasons 1 and 2 Treatment Composition C (n = 12) Each sample is a composite sample of three replicates.
Table 2 Different treatment composition Treatment Treatment composition T1 POME (50%) + PPF (50%) T2 POME (50%) + PPF (25%) + CD (25%) T3 POME (50%) + PPF (20%) + CD (15%) + LM (15%) T4 PPF (100%)a aRepresents the percentage of initial substrate material.
The development of microemulsions for specific oilfield applications requires a systematic study of phase behavior as an important tool to select a treatment composition that satisfies specific parameters defined by the application.
This means that resistance generation depends not only on the treatment composition, but also on the dosages of the various drugs.
Similar(56)
T1, T2, T3, and T4 represent treatment compositions (see Table 2).
The field dosage rates did not show any improvement with curing, however other treatment compositions indicated slight to moderate increase in CBR performance due to curing.
In the high stress treatments composition differed strongly among microcosms, with five microcosms losing all but the cylopoid FG, with the majority dominated by either a cyclopoid-harpacticoid community (n = 3) or an cyclopoid-ostracod (n = 2) community.
One and four years after treatment, the fecal microbial communities had partially recovered to their pre-treatment compositions, however these were still separated along CA axis 2 (Fig. 6B).
In contrast to the situation for the controls, the throat and fecal microbiotas in treated patients differed considerably from their pre-treatment compositions according to Bray-Curtis analysis (Fig. 7A and 7B) and by CA analysis (Fig. 5B and 6B).
By this treatment cation composition of treated water was not modified but all the anion except chloride was partially eliminated and substituted chloride ions.
Patterns of C and N accumulation varied with both treatment (litter composition) and environmental conditions (site), but the general response was similar in both plantations.
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