ライフサイエンスコーパス: limit of

1 e range of 0.05-400 ng mL(-1) with detection limit of 0.015 ng mL(-1).

2 0.05-590 muM and 0.05-1220 muM and detection limit of 0.0169 muM and 0.044 muM respectively.

3 optimized MOF-sensor had a CN(-) -detection limit of 0.05 mum, which is much lower than traditional

4 range of 0.533-6.81 ng mL-1 and a detection limit of 0.079 ng mL-1.

5 from 0.4 to 62.5 ppm of SDS with a detection limit of 0.1 ppm.

6 HA from 0.33 uM to 110 uM with the detection limit of 0.11 uM (S/N = 3).

7 with two linear calibration curve, detection limit of 0.22 muM DA, and sensitivity of 4.9 mA/mM((DA))

8 Using a cut off limit of 0.3, resulted in the correct identification of

9 ndwidth of 543 kHz and an ultralow detection limit of 0.33 nW.

10 ed a linear response with a lowest detection limit of 0.38 and 0.48 ng/mL, respectively.

11 to 0.24 mg L(-1)) with the lowest detection limit of 0.396 muM (i.e., mass/volume concentration of 0

12 s, all cadmium concentrations were below the limit of 0.4 mg/kg.

13 .005-2.5 and 2.5-130 muM and a low detection limit of 0.9 nM.

14 tection of dimethyl sulfide and histamine at limits of 0.5 and 0.035 mug/mL, respectively.

15 tic figure of merit (FOM) and noninferiority limit of -0.10.

16 ch 4, 2020), using an assay with a detection limit of 1 copy per mL.

17 ptimized, physiologically relevant detection limit of 1.0 nM.

18 vity of 0.176 uA L umol(-1)(,) and detection limit of 1.32 umol L(-1) were calculated.

19 The biosensor showed detection limit of 1.6 ng . mL(-1) and a linear dynamic range of 6

20 eloped for mouse immunoglobulin G, detection limits of 1.5 ng/mL and >10 ng/mL were achieved in buffe

21 quitous in all non-mammals, but has an upper limit of ~1 kHz.

22 glycol (PEG) chemistry enables low detection limits of 10 pg mL(-1) or better for all protein biomark

23 tivity (1:1200, ovalbumin/BSA) and detection limit of 100 attomole is attained for glycans and furthe

24 The method enabled a detection limit of ~110 fg/mL biotinylated bovine serum albumin in

25 An upper limit of 122 m was used due to local regulations prohibi

26 s were minor when adjusting musts within the limit of 13.5 degrees Baume.

27 portantly, the sensor can detect even in the limits of 15-110 units/liter.

28 n the range of 10.0-300.0 muM with detection limits of 2.07 muM and 1.34 muM for salinomycin and madu

29 n 10(3) and 10(9) cells L(-1) with detection limit of 3 x 10(3) cells L(-1) of A. minutum AL9T.

30 Here, it is demonstrated that this limit of 3+ for Ni and Fe can be exceeded via synthesis

31 sis methods compared, leading to a detection limit of ~3 mg/mL for Gly.

32 between 0.1 muM and 10 muM, with a detection limit of 31 nM.

33 These pores have a size limit of 39 nanometres(4-7), which raises the question o

34 s per hour, together with adequate detection limit of 4.7 mumol L(-1).

35 Within a detection limit of 42 RNA copies per reaction, SHERLOCK was 100% s

36 Additionally, due to the high qualifying limit of 45Q for the power sector, e.g., 500 ktCO(2)/yr,

37 sensitive detection of DNA, with a detection limit of 5.2 fM (a linear range of from 0.1 pM to 10 nM)

38 avy metal ions with a breakthrough detection limit of 50 nM.

39 inuous analyte enrichment afforded detection limits of 500 fg of protein (250 pM) while simultaneous

40 nd 1.5442 x 10(7) M(-1) with lower detection limits of 52 and 110 nM, respectively.

41 h sub-threshold values approaching the ideal limit of 60 mV/dec and complementary inverter amplifier

42 for a 1 mum device, we estimate a detection limit of 700 nT Hz(-1/2) at room temperature, 80 nT Hz(-

43 pected in must and wine samples, a detection limit of 75 +/- 12 mg L(-1) K(+), and an adequate reprod

44 ormat as an exemplar, we achieve a detection limit of 8.2 x 10(-19) molar for a biotin-avidin model,

45 A detection limit of 9.1 x 10(-17) g/g for (135)Cs and (137)Cs was a

46 With a detection limit of a few fmol mm(-2), and the possibility for sub-

47 d biotic factors can interact to impact both limits of a species' range.

48 s plant functional traits, change within the limits of abiotic stress tolerance.

49 rong performance (albeit below the practical limits of about 30 per cent and 35 per cent, respectivel

50 n nuclear accrual to establish size, and the limits of adaptability in adult skeletal muscle.

51 sm diopters (PD) and a half-width of the 95% limit of agreement of +/-11.4 PD.

52 Altman analysis was used to derive bias, 95% limits of agreement (LOA) and confidence intervals (CI).

53 a mean positive bias of 2.693 +/- 8.640 (95% limits of agreement - 14.24 to 19.63%), when compared to

54 and standard GAT results was -0.9 mmHg (95% limits of agreement [LoA], -5.4 to 3.6 mmHg).

55 Bias and 95% limits of agreement for average diameter were smaller wi

56 hain reaction and the assays were within the limits of agreement in Bland-Altman analysis.

57 IPD ratio = 0.96, p = 0.044) models, but the limits of agreement show that for individual meta-analys

58 D to HRIPD ratio = 0.95, p = 0.007), but the limits of agreement show that for individual trials, the

59 The 95% limits of agreement were between TD OCT and SD OCT were

60 However, the limits of agreement were not narrow enough to consider A

61 ifference: -0.034+/-0.035 mL.min(-1).cc(-1), limits of agreement: [-0.103 to 0.035] mL.min(-1).cc(-1)

62 difference: 0.057+/-0.361 mL.min(-1).cc(-1), limits of agreement: [-0.651 to 0.765] mL.min(-1).cc(-1)

63 valuate the estimator for correlation, bias, limits of agreements, and linearity between predicted fa

64 f widely ranging abundances, challenging the limits of analytical technologies.

65 is the most useful predictor of the climatic limits of angiosperm trees.

66 Environmental limits of animal life are invariably revised when the an

67 l arterial blood pressure (ABPopt) and lower limit of autoregulation (LLA).

68 We discuss the limits of Bessel and Butterworth filters for resolving c

69 ted Taxol, the flagship taxane, as the upper limit of chemical complexity and employed two-phase terp

70 gh coherence) and random networks (the lower limit of coherence).

71 allowing patterning far below the resolution limit of conventional photolithography.

72 of devices to demonstrate an intrinsic upper limit of D* as a function of the optical gap.

73 nt morphologies of ZnO NWs and achieve a low limit of detection (0.4 pg ml(-1)) in detecting p24 anti

74 e linear response range (7.5-300 muM); lower limit of detection (0.66 muM), excellent limit of quanti

75 We found that Xpert Xpress had the lowest limit of detection (100% detection at 100 copies/ml), fo

76 The limit of detection (LOD = 3 s/n) values of NH(3) and NH(

77 sensitivity was 0.51 A M(-1) cm(-2), and the limit of detection (LOD) 26 nM.

78 Interestingly, the limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantification (LO

79 The limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantitation (LOQ)

80 The nanosensor also demonstrated superior limit of detection (LOD) and sensitivity of 1.68 x 10(-2

81 tage (99.0%) was estimated interpolating the limit of detection (LOD) for the isobaric internal stand

82 The limit of detection (LOD) is 1 fM, which is achieved with

83 mance liquid chromatography (HPLC-FD) with a limit of detection (LOD) of 0.05 ng/mL for OTA.

84 Our developed method showed the limit of detection (LOD) of 0.08 ng mL(-1) for p-CA and

85 oderate sensitivity of 0.0164 OD.mL/ng and a limit of detection (LOD) of 0.74 ng/mL.

86 ange of 3 ag.ml(-1) -1.9 ug.ml(-1) and a low limit of detection (LOD) of 0.9 +/- 0.04 ag ml(-1).

87 in a broad range from 10 aM to 100 pM and a limit of detection (LOD) of 10 aM was obtained, which wa

88 ibited unprecedented high sensitivity with a limit of detection (LOD) of 10(0) CFU/mL (1-9 CFU/mL), r

89 earity of 20-200 mug L(-1) was found, with a limit of detection (LOD) of 11.30 mug L(-1) for Cd(II) a

90 ility (RSD = 2.2%, at 500 muM, n = 7), and a limit of detection (LOD) of 11.7 muM.

91 The biosensor achieved a limit of detection (LOD) of 14 CFU/mL, the lowest report

92 to the full-length aptamer (124 nM), with a limit of detection (LOD) of 2 nM.

93 ensitivity and selectivity to insulin with a limit of detection (LOD) of 26 and 81 fM in buffer and h

94 In this study, the limit of detection (LOD) of M. tuberculosis H37Rv in all

95 The limit of detection (LOD) was 6.5, 5.5, or 5.1 mg GAE (ga

96 The limit of detection (LOD) was defined for each wine teste

97 The limit of detection (LoD) was found to be 8.8 ng/L with s

98 ch as real-time PCR demonstrate excellent an limit of detection (LOD) whereas antigenic methods are a

99 ease in ligand sensitivity and a decrease in limit of detection (LOD).

100 ore per molecule labeling stoichiometry, the limit of detection (S/N > 3) and limit of quantitation (

101 range of 2 to 2 x 10(6) cells mL(-1) with a limit of detection 1 cell mL(-1).

102 on in solution by fluorescence spectroscopy (limit of detection 3 pM) and on surfaces at the single-p

103 individual aquatic insect samples (range of <limit of detection [<LOD] to 1670.10 ng/g of wet weight

104 semen was undetectable in both plasma (lower limit of detection [LLD] <12 copies per mL) and cells (L

105 Baseline hs-cTnT (limit of detection [LoD] 3 ng/l) and CAC measurements we

106 ssue by imaging mass spectrometry (IMS), the limit of detection and dynamic range are of paramount im

107 der optimized conditions, the working range, limit of detection and pre-concentration factor were det

108 (range 0.05-5.00 mg per assay), sensitivity (limit of detection and quantification 4.4 and 14.9 ug/mL

109 tion curve of excellent linearity, and a low limit of detection and quantification of GlcN.

110 The limit of detection and quantification of physostigmine d

111 II band in aqueous solutions that achieves a limit of detection as low as 0.0025 mg mL(-1) (outperfor

112 The portable detection strategy achieved a limit of detection as low as 0.056 ng/mL with high speci

113 s at low copy number is problematic with the limit of detection at 95 percent confidence predicted to

114 ntration of nitrite in pork and enhanced the limit of detection by analyzing the coffee-ring effect.

115 The limit of detection for chemical sensing of Crystal Viole

116 s detected by RT-qPCR and viral culture; the limit of detection for culturing SARS-CoV-2 from surface

117 The sensor limit of detection for formaldehyde was 0.2 mg L(-1), an

118 The limit of detection for one of the systems reached submic

119 The limit of detection for our electrochemical biosensor was

120 The limit of detection for oxycodone with the Nafion/SWCNT s

121 Limit of detection for this bacterial sensor was 10 CFU/

122 targets with higher sensitivity, achieving a limit of detection in the femtomolar range without any t

123 ivity of 128.61 +/- 0.15 degrees RIU(-1) and limit of detection obtained at 2.2 x 10(-6) RIU with exc

124 n the range of 0.02-10 ug mL(-1) (r > 0.99), limit of detection of 0.005 ug mL(-1), satisfactory sele

125 wed a linear range of 0.1-1000 ng mL(-1) and limit of detection of 0.022 ng mL(-1) within 30 min towa

126 using differential-pulse voltammetry with a limit of detection of 0.032 mumol L(-1).

127 sembled Au chip which was shown to exhibit a limit of detection of 0.19 nM and a linear detection ran

128 The multiplexed biosensor showed a limit of detection of 0.26 IU/mL (624 pg/mL) and 14 ng/m

129 ing catechol in natural water samples with a limit of detection of 0.26 mumol L(-1).

130 terol, which showed a significantly improved limit of detection of 0.46 ng and linear dynamic range o

131 e range from 3.0 to 140.0 mumol L(-1) with a limit of detection of 0.71 mumol L(-1).

132 to date, achieving an improved sensitivity (limit of detection of 0.9 pM for the short synthetic oli

133 ed to enumerate particles on paper, with the limit of detection of 1 cell/muL.

134 plasma without any extraction steps, with a limit of detection of 1.32 pM that enabled the identific

135 r response range of 0.005-50 nM, and a lower limit of detection of 1.9 pM (S/N = 3), with a high sens

136 This novel sensor has a limit of detection of 1.93 uM, below that of the US envi

137 50 MHz-per 150 mg/dL of glucose), possess a limit of detection of 10 mg/dL, and a step response time

138 ect glucose from 10 muM to 9 mM with a lower limit of detection of 10 muM.

139 ctrochemical immunosensor is able to reach a limit of detection of 10(5) exosomes muL(-1) directly in

140 tforward (three steps) and sensitive, with a limit of detection of 16% (3.9 ug/L) and 11% (5.3 ug/L)

141 th a sample-to-answer time of ~50 min, and a limit of detection of 2 copies per sample.

142 nsor surface, we demonstrate an extrapolated limit of detection of 2.2 CFU/ml from experimental data

143 near working range (62.5-2000 ng/mL), with a limit of detection of 2.81 ng/mL.

144 with three specific peptides allowing for a limit of detection of 25 ng/mL.

145 his to generate a biosensing platform with a limit of detection of 3 nM and capable of the detection

146 A limit of detection of 3 pg/muL of DNA, similar to the av

147 The assay was specific and has a limit of detection of 3.71 U/mL.

148 omolar to micromolar concentration range and limit of detection of 5 nM.

149 o 8.0 x 10(-4) mol L(-1) linear range with a limit of detection of 5.1 x 10(-6) mol L(-1).

150 ponse from 0.05 to 5 muM and 5-30 muM with a limit of detection of 6 nM.

151 exhibited a linearity of 7 logs with a lower limit of detection of 6.0 x 10(2) copies of molecules pe

152 wed acceptable linearity (R(2) = 0.97) and a limit of detection of 6.7 ppm.

153 mL(-1) to 150 ng mL(-1) of PARK7/DJ-1 with a limit of detection of 7.5 ng mL(-1).

154 ently detect two copies of viral RNA, with a limit of detection of a single copy and can be completed

155 A very low limit of detection of about 0.15 ng/mL was obtained duri

156 ded for the entire procedure that achieved a limit of detection of about 1 pM or 50 amol/measurement,

157 st one-order-of-magnitude improvement in the limit of detection of ferrocyanide ions relative to conv

158 The probit 95% limit of detection of the assay was determined to be 0.0

159 The limit of detection of the model and scanner using serial

160 o be fast and highly sensitive, exhibiting a limit of detection of ~2 CFU mL(-1).

161 below two parasites per microliter blood, a limit of detection suggested by the World Health Organiz

162 c concentration range was 30-300 pM, and the limit of detection was 22 fM.

163 The lower limit of detection was 64 parasites/ml.

164 The method limit of detection was 7.1x10(-6) U/mL of LPO in milk an

165 The limit of detection was approximately 10(2) CFU/mL and th

166 The limit of detection was compared to a WHO-prequalified ra

167 The observed limit of detection was more than 30-fold better than tha

168 assay with even higher analytic sensitivity (limit of detection, 0.1 ng/L).

169 ownstream of the UV-C reactor were below the limit of detection, the true log reduction is likely eve

170 The limit of detection, under gelatin admixed conditions, wa

171 in the linear range 2.5-50 muM, with 2.0 muM limit of detection, without interference from lead, cadm

172 .22 (1.06-4.61) ng/L in 2001-2002 and 1.18 (<limit of detection-2.92) ng/L in 2011-2012.

173 A higher sensitivity (Limit of detection-LoD, 6.54*10(5) CFU/ml) of the Lamb w

174 od linearity (R(2) > 0.99), with appropriate limits of detection (0.05-10 ng/g) and limits of quantit

175 The limits of detection (10.0 and 5.0 mg.L(-1) for ethylene

176 In validation experiments the limits of detection (LOD < 8 mg/L) and quantification (L

177 measured with multiple assays with variable limits of detection (LOD) and lower limits of quantifica

178 r mass response (R(2) = 0.9983), low ng/m(3) limits of detection (LoD), and a fast response time (1 s

179 Instrument limits of detection (LOD; 2sigma, 10 s) were 120 parts p

180 The limits of detection (LODs) were 150 CFU/ml or 3 fg/mul o

181 universal functionalization method, showing limits of detection and quantification in the pM-nM rang

182 r in the range of 0.08-2.10 mumol L(-1) with limits of detection and quantification of 72.6 and 220 n

183 as sensitivity, analytical sensitivity, and limits of detection and quantitation.

184 Limits of detection as low as 27 ppb and sensor-to-senso

185 Limits of detection calculated on fortified samples were

186 eous plugs segmented by carrier fluid), with limits of detection down to 7 nM (35 amol).

187 n for protonated monomers and hundred ppt(v) limits of detection for proton-bound dimers measured for

188 ess, this still leads to single-digit ppt(v) limits of detection for protonated monomers and hundred

189 s containing multiple analyte molecules, the limits of detection improve only by a factor of 3 to 4 f

190 Both methods showed limits of detection in the lower femtomol range.

191 ls to provide large signal amplification and limits of detection in the sub-fg mL(-1) range, a protoc

192 After optimization, the limits of detection obtained were 7.37, 8.63, and 9.64 u

193 to 15 g L(-1) for glucose and fructose with limits of detection of 0.012 g L(-1) and 0.010 g L(-1),

194 2 orders of magnitude (R(2) >= 0.9977) with limits of detection of 0.7-1.55 mug/L.

195 .5 x 10(3), and 15-3.0 x 10(3) ng kg(-1) and limits of detection of 1.37 +/- 0.10, 4.7 +/- 1.2, and 1

196 can quantify prostate specific antigen with limits of detection of 1.4-2.8 ng mL(-1).

197 Limits of detection of the method were in the range 5.1-

198 The limits of detection of the method were in the range of 0

199 Limits of detection ranged from <=10 to 74 copies/ml for

200 The ion-molecule reaction limits of detection ranged from 50 pM to 250 nM with the

201 n ranges from 0.01 to 1500 ng mL(-1) and the limits of detection were in a range from 0.18 ng L(-1) t

202 The dSimoa platform achieves attomolar limits of detection, with an up to 25-fold improvement i

203 iscrepancy in VL values because of different limits of detection.

204 The limit of detections (LOD) for cytochrome c was 0.5 nM.

205 Working strategies, limit of detections, advantages and shortcomings of the

206 The limit of determination values (based on visual evaluatio

207 ata communication bandwidth and overcome the limits of electrical interconnects, silicon photonic tec

208 ategy that promises to approach the physical limit of flow boiling heat transfer is reported.

209 namics previously established in the large-M limit of [Formula: see text] symmetric models to models

210 and the inductive detector, can overcome the limits of frequency resolution in NMR.

211 robots that are smaller than the resolution limit of human vision (less than a hundred micrometres)(

212 y can be more open and transparent about the limits of human knowledge.

213 bility assessment has long been considered a limit of hypothermic oxygenated machine perfusion (HOPE)

214 nd shared protein domains in the sensing and limiting of infections during the multiple emergences of

215 or the same molecular machine illustrate the limits of inferring biochemical mechanism from protein s

216 pose was to define a clinically useful lower limit of injected dose for (68)Ga-prostate-specific memb

217 To extend the upper limit of inlet flow rate, a 14:1 split-ratio flow splitt

218 uded all recipients (n = 26) above the upper limit of interquartile range for weight gain at 1 year.

219 ANME thrive at the thermodynamic limit of life, are slow-growing, and in most cases form

220 Extreme environments test the limits of life; yet, some organisms thrive in harsh cond

221 [Formula: see text] density of states in the limit of low frequencies omega.

222 esult may constitute a fundamental low-field limit of magnetic resonance in carrier-pair-based system

223 e would alleviate the accessibility and cost limits of magnetic-resonance imaging for diagnosing live

224 zing temperatures control the northern range limits of many invasive nonnative species.

225 se our theoretical framework to estimate the limits of mechanosensing in a biopolymer network, a sens

226 demonstrated to break through the resolution limit of micro-supercapacitors by preparing nano-superca

227 11A to gamma-globin and illustrate potential limits of murine models of globin gene regulation.

228 Despite the vastly different detection limits of NMR and MS, chemometric analysis of the data y

229 p between load and contact area spanning the limits of non-adhesive normal contact to adhesive contac

230 showed moderate liver injury (ALT 2-5x upper limit of normal [ULN]) in 22.2% (n = 18) and severe live

231 as defined as FEV(1)/FVC less than the lower limit of normal in individuals under 50 years of age wit

232 m lactate dehydrogenase (two times the upper limit of normal or more).

233 ess or alanine aminotransferase > 10 x upper limit of normal) or anti-HCV antibody seroconversion wit

234 group; for those values exceeding the upper limit of normal, the mortality increases in the recombin

235 -19, 51% had troponin levels above the upper limit of normal.

236 were calculated to establish upper and lower limits of normal.

237 Finally, we address the value and limits of NPM1-based measurable residual disease assessm

238 a gelatin hydrogel to overcome the diffusion limit of nutrients and oxygen three-dimensionally.

239 point (absolute risk difference 1.29% [upper limit of one-sided 95% CI 2.50%]; P(noni)(nferiority)=0.

240 th product (TBP) exceeding the 'fundamental' limit of ordinary resonant systems by a factor of 30.

241 The detection limit of our proposed SEF-AuNI sensors for model bacteri

242 is commentary, we discuss the importance and limits of patient registries to support decision-making

243 Our study highlights the limits of phylogenetic resolution in relation to rapid s

244 s exhibited lithium concentrations below the limit of quantification (0.5 mg/kg).

245 wer limit of detection (0.66 muM), excellent limit of quantification (2.19 muM) and good reproducibil

246 Target DNA could be detected with the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) of 1.0 nM with a relative

247 erestingly, the limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantification (LOQ) were calculated as 0.13 mu

248 The limit of quantification of each analyte was 0.15 mg/kg f

249 explorative biomarkers were validated with a limit of quantification that was comparable with convent

250 n for formaldehyde was 0.2 mg L(-1), and the limit of quantification was 0.6 mg L(-1), which were clo

251 ir potable water had microplastics above the limit of quantification.

252 For Hg, all analyzed samples were below the limit of quantification.

253 variable limits of detection (LOD) and lower limits of quantification (LLOQ).

254 The developed method has presented limits of quantification (LOQ) of 0.72, 0.12, and 1.5 mu

255 .99 across 3 orders of magnitude and 80% had limits of quantification below 0.5 ng/mL.

256 Limits of quantification obtained by MIC were 0.034 (As)

257 to the need for high selectivity and/or low limits of quantification.

258 The limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantitation (LOQ) were achieved as 0.019 and 0

259 ometry, the limit of detection (S/N > 3) and limit of quantitation (S/N > 10) were determined as 0.02

260 riate limits of detection (0.05-10 ng/g) and limits of quantitation (0.15-30 ng/g) for the analytes t

261 he level of serum creatinine above the upper limit of reference interval values according to publishe

262 ons in the DNA of any organism; however, the limit of resolution for standard NGS is poor.

263 PicoLC-MS extends the limit of separation science and is expected to be a powe

264 re and 1 were due to a colony count near the limit of significance.

265 igenesis have remained mysterious due to the limits of single-cell analysis.

266 ary forces underpinning metazoan life at the limits of small physical and genome size.

267 s successfully identified by reaching up the limit of spatial resolution of 35 nm.

268 The lower limit of the 2-sided 90% confidence interval was -1.724

269 Noninferiority was defined as the lower limit of the 95% CI for the difference in success rates

270 il fumarate for HIV prevention, as the upper limit of the 95% CI of the IRR, was less than the prespe

271 unconventional Hall response in the quantum limit of the bulk semimetal HfTe(5), adjacent to the thr

272 urface of the devices and thus the detection limit of the devices has been achieved to a value as low

273 um stress generated is less than the plastic limit of the graphene.

274 For all eyes, the repeatability limit of the location of Kmax was 0.82 mm and 0.80 mm fo

275 The visual detection limit of the MRSA aptasensor swab was less than 100 CFU/

276 The detection limit of the new 25 mum diameter glucose sensor is 10.0

277 The western limit of the ophiolite is defined onshore by the Semail

278 ke parasite intensity, as long as the lethal limit of the parasite is not crossed, on average, there

279 gth of the bands within the apparent elastic limit of the phase mixture.

280 Under optimal conditions, the detection limit of the sensor is as low as 0.47 ng/L, and it can b

281 In particular, we consider the limits of the current 'myocentric' paradigm given the wi

282 rovide critical insight into the fundamental limits of the dynamics of magnetic solitons and establis

283 neurodegeneration does not spread beyond the limits of the MacTel area.

284 re all greater than 99.2%, and the detection limits of the method ranged from 0.3 to 6.7 ng L(-1).

285 iking level of detail, and also identify the limits of the prediction.

286 Within the limits of the present study, it can be concluded that th

287 are selected in environments challenging the limits of their plasticity, the evolved mutations not on

288 ible biofluids at levels below the detection limits of these techniques.

289 ty assays show good correlation at the outer limits of thiol reactivity but less so for compounds wit

290 We hypothesized that targeting the lower limit of this range would improve outcomes in patients w

291 in, which may contribute to the high packing limit of this unique protein.

292 COVID-19 has exposed the limits of this approach to health.

293 Here, we have explored the limits of this geometric factor and found that the ethyl

294 The limits of this method were also tested.

295 ng chemotherapy protocols, within admissible limits of toxicity, for palliative treatment of metastat

296 opology previously considered on the extreme limits of "undruggability" for an intracellular target.

297 tiometric titrations to determine solubility limits of various organic compounds by exploiting their

298 e most expensive breaches approach the upper limits of vertebrate muscle performance, and the energet

299 This linearity is obtained in the limit of very large recurrent coupling strength.

300 ses has transformed our understanding of the limits of viral complexity, but the extent of their enco