OUR TEAM
Name: Roberto A. Aguirre Role(s)
 Name: Shelby S. Martin Role(s)
 Name: Christopher G. Cusick Role(s)
 Name: Neel A. Pendyala Role(s)
 Name: Abby Monhollen Role(s)


LAB 2 WRITEUP
Descriptive Statistics
Experiment 1 (Rats)
'
 '
 Rat Study

  Inflammotin Levels

 0mg  10 mg

 9.24  22.34

 8.76  6.45

 8.78  14.23

 13.5  3.55

 12.3  8.99

Average  10.516  11.112

Standard Deviation  2.225551617  7.402885924

Endpoint Number  5  5

Standard Error  0.995296941  3.310671231


Experiment 2 (Humans)
'
 '
 Human Study
 '
 '

  Inflammotin Levels  

 0 mg  5 mg  10 mg  15 mg

 5.23  10.72  100.19  793.17

 1.01  9.29  75.92  476.67

 4.23  8.46  23.46  771.45

 1.87  10.19  70.87  795.09

 3.67  7.29  19.27  181.27

 2.98  7.54  99.65  752.78

 5.83  8.67  38.37  934.23

 5.24  6.15  76.26  554.87

 4.27  10.92  35.25  692.23

 4.01  10.09  76.98  627.65

Average  3.834  8.932  61.622  657.941

Standard Deviation  1.523010177  1.593931547  30.11069386  212.9429762

Endpoing Number  10  10  10  10

Standard Error  0.481618106  0.504045412  9.521837451  67.33848166


Results
Experiment 1
Experiment 2
(Please include welllabeled graphs of the results.)
Analysis
Experiment 1 (Rats)
'
 Treatment
 '

 0 mg  10 mg

 9.24  22.34

 8.76  6.45

 8.78  14.23

 13.5  3.55

 12.3  8.99

Average  10.516  11.112

Standard Deviation  2.225551617  7.402885924

T Test  0.867403497 

Significant?  No 


Experiment 2 (Humans)
Anova: Single Factor
 '
 '
 '
 '
 '
 '

     

SUMMARY      

Groups  Count  Sum  Average  Variance  

0 mg  10  38.34  3.834  2.31956  

5 mg  10  89.32  8.932  2.540617778  

10 mg  10  616.22  61.622  906.6538844  

15 mg  10  6579.41  657.941  45344.71112  

     

     

ANOVA      

Source of Variation  SS  df  MS  F  Pvalue  F crit

Between Groups  3027016.695  3  1009005.565  87.25360195  1.40083E16  2.866265551

Within Groups  416306.0267  36  11564.0563   

     

Total  3443322.721  39    


PostHoc Tests
 t test value
 Corrected P Value to Achieve Significance
 Significant?

0mg vs 5mg  8.59631E07  0.0083  Yes

0mg vs 10mg  9.94377E06  0.0083  Yes

0mg vs 15mg  1.39436E08  0.0083  Yes

5mg vs 10mg  3.01859E05  0.0083  Yes

5mg vs 15mg  1.57101E08  0.0083  Yes

10mg vs 15mg  6.4824E08  0.0083  Yes


In the first experiment with the rats, there was no statistical significance between 0 mg of the lipopolysaccaride and 10 mg of the lipopolysaccaride because the p value for the two tailed TTest was less than .05 (less than 95% confidence). In the second test with the humans, there was a statistically significant difference between the treatment groups,as determined by the single factor ANOVA test. However, this did not determine which treatment groups were statistically significant. So, a Bonferroni Correction was applied and a corrected p value was determined to be .0083. A TTest was then run between all treatment groups and all TTest results were less than the corrected p value, indicating that they are statistically significant.
Summary/Discussion
Experiment 1 (rats): For this experiment, we saw a slight increase in protein levels from 0mg to 10mg of lipopolysaccharides. However, once we did the ttest we found the change to not be statistically significant due to the pvalue of 0.867 being greater than alpha level of 0.05. Therefore, the results cannot be attributed to the change in dosage level in the pills and this is most likely due to chance.
Experiment 2 (humans): In this experiment, we observed an exponential increase between dosage amount and protein levels in human subjects. This is evident in the sharp increase in protein levels from 10 mg to 15 mg of lipopolysaccharide in the graph. Unlike the experiment with rats, a statistically significant relationship was found between dosage amount of lipopolysaccharide and protein levels. This was determined by performing an ANOVA analysis and then a Bonferroni Correction to show that the pvalues of all treatment groups were less than 0.05 (95% confidence), indicating a statically significant relationship (as further explained in "Analysis" section). Since the pvalues of all treatment groups were less than 0.05, we can conclude that the increase in protein levels was directly attributable to change in dosage levels of polysaccharide and not a result of natural variation or chance.
