## 4 Results and Discussion  
The main purpose of this study is to investigate the study of radiation and multiple slip effects on magnetohydrodynamic bioconvection flow of micropolar based nanofluid over a stretching surface. In Table 1, the comparison of skin friction coefficient with already published papers is made to justify the validation of the current structure. A strong correlation is observed between the results. Table 2 shows the comparison of Pr and M for skin friction with already published papers. In Table 3, comparison of \(-\theta^{\prime}(0)\) with different values of Pr is shown. It is obvious that with the boosting values of Pr there is an increment in the \(-\theta^{\prime}(0)\). For the confirmation of the accuracy of the present numerical structure, a comparison of the current result for Nusselt number with different values of Pr, M and R are made when all other parameters are zero, with already published results shown in Table 4. It is found that there is an outstanding correlation arise between the results. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \(M\) & **[PERSON] et al. [45]** & **[PERSON] [47]** & **Our Results** & **P\(\_\)r** & **[PERSON] et al. [45]** & **[PERSON] [47]** & **Our Results** \\ \hline
0 & \(-1.0000082\) & \(-1.0000084\) & \(-1.0000081\) & - & - & - & - \\
1 & \(1.41421353\) & \(1.41421356\) & \(1.41421354\) & - & - & - & - \\
5 & \(2.44948963\) & \(2.44948974\) & \(2.44948968\) & 0.72 & 0.8088 & 0.8088 & 0.8086 \\
10 & \(3.31662463\) & \(3.31662479\) & \(3.31662475\) & 1 & 1.0000 & 1.0000 & 1.0000 \\
50 & \(7.14142839\) & \(7.14142843\) & \(7.14142841\) & 3 & 1.9237 & 1.9245 \\
100 & \(10.0498751\) & \(10.0498756\) & \(10.0498754\) & 10 & 3.7207 & 3.7207 & 3.7212 \\
500 & \(22.3830283\) & \(22.3830293\) & \(22.3830298\) & - & - & - \\
1000 & \(31.6385833\) & \(31.6385840\) & \(31.6385838\) & - & - & - \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Skin friction and Prandtl number comparison for various values of \(M\) and \(Pr\). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \(M\) & **[PERSON] et al. [45]** & **[PERSON] et al. [45]** & **[PERSON] et al. [46]** & **[PERSON] et al. [29]** & **Our Results** \\ \hline
0.0 & \(1.0000080\) & \(1.0000010\) & \(1.0000130\) & \(1.0000110\) \\
0.2 & \(1.0954458\) & \(1.095\) & \(1.0954463\) & \(1.0954453\) \\
0.5 & \(1.2247446\) & \(1.224\) & \(1.2247454\) & \(1.2247434\) \\
1.0 & \(1.4142132\) & \(1.414\) & \(1.4142180\) & \(1.4142160\) \\
1.2 & \(1.4832393\) & \(1.483\) & \(1.4832402\) & \(1.4832396\) \\
1.5 & \(1.5811384\) & \(1.581\) & \(1.5811396\) & \(1.5811382\) \\
2.0 & \(1.7320504\) & \(1.732\) & \(1.7320516\) & \(1.7320512\) \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Comparison of skin friction coefficient for various values of \(M\). \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline \(Pr\) & **[PERSON] et al. [5]** & **[PERSON] et al. [45]** & **[PERSON] et al. [48]** & **[PERSON] et al. [49]** & **Our Results** \\ \hline
0.72 & 0.8086 & 0.808634 & 0.808634 & - & 0.808633 \\
1.00 & 1.0000 & 1.000008 & 1.000001 & 1.0004 & 1.000008 \\
3.00 & 1.9236 & 1.923678 & 1.923683 & 1.9234 & 1.923677 \\
10.0 & 3.7206 & 3.720668 & 3.720674 & 3.7205 & 3.720658 \\
100 & 12.2946 & - & - & 12.2962 & 12.29405 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Nusselt number comparison for various values of Prandtl number. Now, we see the influence of different parameters graphically on velocity \(f(\eta)\), temperature \(\theta(\eta)\), volume fraction of nanoparticles \(\phi(\eta)\), density of motile microorganisms \(\xi(\eta)\) and angular velocity \(g(\eta)\) profiles along with fixing the remaining parameters \(M=1\), \(K=0.5\), \(K_{p}=0.2\), \(Rb=0.1\), \(Nr=0.1\), \(\lambda=0.2\), \(\delta=0.2\), \(R=0.5\), \(Pr=1\), \(B=Nb=Nt=0.1\), \(\Omega=0.2\), \(Lb=1.2\), \(Pe=1.2\) and \(Ln=5\), \(f_{w}=1\), \(m=0.5\). The effect of magnetic parameter \(M\) and hydrodynamic slip is shown in Figure 2. Decrement behavior shown for velocity with rising the values of \(M\).