| 查看: 485 | 回复: 1 | |||
[求助]
怎么翻译都感觉不对啊，麻烦翻一下
|
| One reason for this difference is that biological macromolecules are much more flexible than the component molecules studied in 2D supramolecular assemblies, which are small and, with some exceptions, are often treated as quasi-rigid building blocks. |
回复此楼» 猜你喜欢
263求调剂
已经有3人回复
-
求调剂
已经有15人回复
-
293调剂
已经有3人回复
-
机械工程264学硕求调剂
已经有3人回复
-
264求调剂
已经有9人回复
-
求调剂
已经有6人回复
-
22408 266求调剂
已经有7人回复
-
273求调剂
已经有43人回复
-
307求调剂
已经有13人回复
-
327求调剂
已经有7人回复
818james
铜虫 (著名写手)
- 翻译EPI: 140
- 应助: 59 (初中生)
- 金币: 7611.1
- 红花: 17
- 帖子: 1455
- 在线: 878.1小时
- 虫号: 3719023
- 注册: 2015-03-08
【答案】应助回帖
★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★ ★
qianyuxin: 金币+10, ★★★很有帮助 2016-02-05 23:22:08
qianyuxin: 金币+10, ★★★很有帮助 2016-02-05 23:22:08
|
One reason for this difference is that biological macromolecules are much more flexible than the component molecules studied in 2D supramolecular assemblies, which are small and, with some exceptions, are often treated as quasi-rigid building blocks. 差异的原因之一是生物大分子比在2D超分子组合中研究的组成分子柔韧很多，后者体积小，除了个别例外，通常被看作是半刚性的构造块。 |
2楼2016-02-05 22:45:43
