Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(7)
Three kinds of real environmental water samples were treated by the as prepared nFe3O4@NH2MIP.
The water samples were treated with 8-HQ under the optimum experimental conditions and metal concentrations were determined by FAAS.
Natural water samples were treated with ultrasound at power levels of 48 and 84 W with treatment times of 5 and 15 min.
The collected water samples were treated with 0.005% cetylpyridinium chloride (CPC) for 15 min to reduce the number of not-desirable microbial contaminants such as fungi, Protista and other bacteria.
The acidified water samples was neutralized and adjusted to a pH of 7. The water samples were treated with concentrated nitric acid following standard procedures of the American Public Health Association, filtered with 0.45 micron filters into 10 mL volumetric flasks and made up to the mark with deionized water (APHA-AWWA-WPCF 1981).
In order to optimise the conditions for the efficient removal of selected elements, nitrogen species, and pathogenic bacteria (Coliform bacteria, Escherichia coli, Intestinal Enterococci and Clostridium perfringens), effluent water samples were treated with different iron loads from each of the investigated nZVI at various mixing and settling times.
Similar(53)
Control samples were treated with water.
Egg-white samples were treated with a water bath, and absorbance, as an expression of turbidity, was determined spectrophotometrically.
For such studies, fluoride-loaded CCSFP samples were treated individually with water at pH 3, 7 and 11.
Thereafter, samples were treated with distilled water (negative control), 0.12% CHX (positive control), 0.07% PHMB, Sanifill Perio Premium™ (0.07% PHMB plus 0.05% NaF), or F solution (0.05% NaF) for 1 min and then subjected to enzymatic challenge for 10 min using a bacterial collagenase (Clostridium hystoliticum, 100 μg/ml).
Seeds of plant samples were treated with mixture of biofertilizer and water (1 10 mL v/v).
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