Sentence examples for variation in reaction from inspiring English sources
In Panel A we see the extensive variation in reaction to a bribe.
Another variation in reaction parameters was made to grow silica around the LaPO4 NCs starting from a suspension of LaPO4 nanocrystals in polar media.
Intra-subject variation in reaction time (ISVRT) is a developmentally-important phenomenon that decreases from childhood through young adulthood in parallel with the development of executive functions and networks.
The principle of robustness to variation in reaction rates can be exploited to check the accuracy of models, and to narrow the range of possibilities when incomplete biological knowledge gives rise to multiple plausible models.
Studies in vertebrates have demonstrated that there is a substantial amount of individual variation in reaction norms [2] and brain gene expression patterns [3] [5] associated with physiological or life history differences that are adaptive in different environmental contexts.
A similar effect – dependence upon phylogenetic scale of the tradeoff underlying variation in reaction norms – was suggested by data on thermal reaction norms of body growth in fish [60].
This was discovered in 2003 by studying the variation in reactions of larvae of the common fruitfly Drosophila to the touch of a heated probe and an unheated one.
These agree with the experimental observations and provide an explanation for variations in reaction selectivity.
Based on variations in reaction of selectivities at several reaction conditions, it could be explained/concluded that formaldehyde was a main product on the MoO3 catalyst and methanol was formed through gas-phase reactions.
Prior work has shown a significant association between trial-by-trial variations in reaction time (RT) and trial-by-trial variations in brain activity as measured by the blood-oxygenated level-dependent (BOLD) response in functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies.
This dehydration rate is lower than is suggested by previous research (Kameda et al. 2011a), primarily as a result of overestimation of the %S within the S C in sample MGLB as well as the geothermal structure of the subduction zone (i.e., variations in reaction rate), with the down-dip limit of the dehydration window extending to >300 °C (Fig. 7).
