Main components of bauxite and BCFD (wt.%). by Nian Liu (29935)

Effects of CGP54626 on NPY^G2WT neurons. by Youjin Oh (3308670)

CD4^SPCD5^hi thymocytes were decreased in either the naturally aged (≥ 18 months old) or the acute atrophied (<i>FoxN1</i> cKO) thymi. by Jiyoung Oh (2010493)

Tonic endocannabinoid signaling is decreased at cortical inhibitory synapses in Nlgn3^R451C mice. by Haley E. Speed (813995)

Image 5_Exploration of the diagnostic and prognostic roles of decreased autoantibodies in lung cancer.tif by Ying Ye (72583)

“…Moreover, 5 of the decreased autoantibodies can also be applied for supervising bone metastasis in lung adenocarcinoma. …”

Tax expression is associated with decreased cellular motility. by Saumya Ramanayake (7879091)

Predicted upstream regulators and hepatic expression of their genes in <i>Fmo5</i>^<i>-/-</i> mice compared with WT mice. by Ian R. Phillips (5074121)

Graphical summary of relationships predicted by IPA to be down-regulated in liver of <i>Fmo5</i>^-/- mice compared with WT mice. by Ian R. Phillips (5074121)

Differences in abundance in liver of <i>Fmo5</i>^<i>-/-</i> and WT mice of products of microbial and host-conjugation reactions. by Ian R. Phillips (5074121)

Table5_Effects of exercise modalities on decreased blood pressure in patients with hypertension.docx by Thiago Rozales Ramis (5311217)

Stability parameters for SpGrx3 WT and mutants. by Trang Van Tran (16913946)

Kinetic parameters of SpGrx3 WT and mutants. by Trang Van Tran (16913946)

<i>Ang1</i>-KO mice develop more severe colitis compared to WT mice. by Alexander Hu (14755811)

S1 File - by Yonghui Zhang (279832)

“…The CSPM, driven by the optimized CSPs, is then evaluated against two independent phenological datasets from Exp. 2 and Exp. 4 described in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0302098#pone.0302098.t002" target="_blank">Table 2</a>. Root means square error (RMSE) (mean absolute error (MAE), coefficient of determination (R²), and Nash Sutcliffe model efficiency (NSE)) are 15.50 (14.63, 0.96, 0.42), 4.76 (3.92, 0.97, 0.95), 4.69 (3.72, 0.98, 0.95), 3.91 (3.40, 0.99, 0.96) and 12.54 (11.67, 0.95, 0.60), 5.07 (4.61, 0.98, 0.93), 4.97 (4.28, 0.97, 0.94), 4.58 (4.02, 0.98, 0.95) for using one, two, three, and four observed phenological stages in the CSPs estimation. …”

Detailed information on field experiments. by Yonghui Zhang (279832)

“…The CSPM, driven by the optimized CSPs, is then evaluated against two independent phenological datasets from Exp. 2 and Exp. 4 described in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0302098#pone.0302098.t002" target="_blank">Table 2</a>. Root means square error (RMSE) (mean absolute error (MAE), coefficient of determination (R²), and Nash Sutcliffe model efficiency (NSE)) are 15.50 (14.63, 0.96, 0.42), 4.76 (3.92, 0.97, 0.95), 4.69 (3.72, 0.98, 0.95), 3.91 (3.40, 0.99, 0.96) and 12.54 (11.67, 0.95, 0.60), 5.07 (4.61, 0.98, 0.93), 4.97 (4.28, 0.97, 0.94), 4.58 (4.02, 0.98, 0.95) for using one, two, three, and four observed phenological stages in the CSPs estimation. …”

List of symbols used in this study. by Yonghui Zhang (279832)

“…The CSPM, driven by the optimized CSPs, is then evaluated against two independent phenological datasets from Exp. 2 and Exp. 4 described in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0302098#pone.0302098.t002" target="_blank">Table 2</a>. Root means square error (RMSE) (mean absolute error (MAE), coefficient of determination (R²), and Nash Sutcliffe model efficiency (NSE)) are 15.50 (14.63, 0.96, 0.42), 4.76 (3.92, 0.97, 0.95), 4.69 (3.72, 0.98, 0.95), 3.91 (3.40, 0.99, 0.96) and 12.54 (11.67, 0.95, 0.60), 5.07 (4.61, 0.98, 0.93), 4.97 (4.28, 0.97, 0.94), 4.58 (4.02, 0.98, 0.95) for using one, two, three, and four observed phenological stages in the CSPs estimation. …”

Data sources for calibration and evaluation. by Yonghui Zhang (279832)

“…The CSPM, driven by the optimized CSPs, is then evaluated against two independent phenological datasets from Exp. 2 and Exp. 4 described in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0302098#pone.0302098.t002" target="_blank">Table 2</a>. Root means square error (RMSE) (mean absolute error (MAE), coefficient of determination (R²), and Nash Sutcliffe model efficiency (NSE)) are 15.50 (14.63, 0.96, 0.42), 4.76 (3.92, 0.97, 0.95), 4.69 (3.72, 0.98, 0.95), 3.91 (3.40, 0.99, 0.96) and 12.54 (11.67, 0.95, 0.60), 5.07 (4.61, 0.98, 0.93), 4.97 (4.28, 0.97, 0.94), 4.58 (4.02, 0.98, 0.95) for using one, two, three, and four observed phenological stages in the CSPs estimation. …”

TSLPR deficient mice show decreased AHR upon HDM exposure. by Latifa Koussih (326043)

Decreasing fluconazole susceptibility of clinical South African <i>Cryptococcus neoformans</i> isolates over a decade by Serisha D. Naicker (8648370)

Mass Spectrometry Experiment 2 and 3: Comparison of Vpu WT and mutants. by Charlotte A. Stoneham (10819125)