BME100 s2015:Group12 12pmL2

BME 100 Spring 2015	Home People Lab Write-Up 1 | Lab Write-Up 2 | Lab Write-Up 3 Lab Write-Up 4 | Lab Write-Up 5 | Lab Write-Up 6 Course Logistics For Instructors Photos Wiki Editing Help
OUR TEAM Name: Corey Soto Name: Kyla Richardson Name: Waseem Aljaid Name: Syeda Rizvi Name: William Chmielewski LAB 2 WRITE-UP Descriptive Statistics Experiment 1 Experiment 2 Results Experiment 1 ‎Experiment 2 Analysis Experiment 1 Experiment 2 Summary/Discussion During the research team's study, four groups of ten human subjects each were given various doses of LPS, with one group given a placebo. An analysis of variance, or ANOVA, was necessary to collect the data, since there were more than two experimental variables (groups) to account for. The information the ANOVA provided showed that a significant difference between the groups' inflammotin levels was apparent. As the dosage of LPS increased, the protein levels elevated more rapidly as well. This trend discovered maintained consistency throughout the four groups. Two groups of ten laboratory mice each were also formed for the experiment. One group of rats was given 10 mg of LPS, while the other served as a control group, receiving a placebo instead. A T-Test was necessary for data analysis, since only two groups of mice were required for the study. The data from the T-Test conducted showed that there was no apparent statistical difference between the groups' inflammotin levels when treatment was administered. The T-Test's p-value of 0.867403497 surpassed the standard alpha value of 0.05 for the study, serving as a basis for this conclusion. The now apparent difference between the human and rat groups may be for several reasons. The data collected from the human groups have the benefit of working with more subjects. Four groups of subjects compared to two groups could suggest a disparity between the conclusions made. Another possible cause could be the anatomical differences between humans and mice and how each species tolerates LPS drug consumption. The research team questions whether the environments the groups were exposed to may also have been a possible cause for statistical difference. How comfortable and conformed each subject was to the experimental atmosphere could suggest how stress was a factor for the study.