User:Alexander Cvitan/Notebook/Experimental Biological Chemistry Lab/2014/03/18: Difference between revisions

From OpenWetWare
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 23: Line 23:
[[Image:Screen_Shot_2014-03-18_at_3.01.11_PM.png]]
[[Image:Screen_Shot_2014-03-18_at_3.01.11_PM.png]]
[[Image:Screen_Shot_2014-03-18_at_3.01.57_PM.png]]
[[Image:Screen_Shot_2014-03-18_at_3.01.57_PM.png]]
* Upon further inspection it appears that the tubes for 2,2 Bipyridine were mislabeled with different concentrators of variable than used in other tests. We were supposed to use .09, .9, and 9mM of variable. As a result, I'm not sure if the concentrations of variable are accurate or are just a mistake in labeling. This experiment should be repeated again.  
* Upon further inspection it appears that the tubes for 2,2 Bipyridine were mislabeled with different concentrators of variable than used in other tests. We were supposed to use .09, .9, and 9mM of variable. As a result, I'm not sure if the concentrations of variable are accurate or are just a mistake in labeling. This experiment should be repeated again. For the sake of data analysis the concentrations listed on the tubes were used for data analysis and appear in the table below.
[[Image:Screen_Shot_2014-03-19_at_3.14.08_PM.png]]
[[Image:Screen_Shot_2014-03-19_at_3.14.08_PM.png]]
*Note that dilution of the control was not necessary. We realized afterwards that the control used to make this graph was not diluted like the variable samples, as a result, the actual absorbance at the peak is closer to were the peak with variable is. The table represented above reflects this dilution and made the calculations accordingly.  
*Note that dilution of the control was not necessary. We realized afterwards that the control used to make this graph was not diluted like the variable samples, as a result, the actual absorbance at the peak is closer to were the peak with variable is. The table represented above reflects this dilution and made the calculations accordingly.  

Revision as of 19:00, 18 April 2014

Biomaterials Design Lab: Spring 2014 <html><img src="/images/9/94/Report.png" border="0" /></html> Main project page
<html><img src="/images/c/c3/Resultset_previous.png" border="0" /></html>Previous entry<html>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;</html>Next entry<html><img src="/images/5/5c/Resultset_next.png" border="0" /></html>

Objective

  • Run UV-Vis of all ratios of BSA-AuNP and 30:1 lysozyme-AuNP samples with 2,2 bipyridine.
  • Take conductivity of 60:1, 70:1, 80:1, 90:1, and 100:1 BSA-AuNPs baked with MgCl2 measured at room temperature.
  • Calculate equilibrium constants for heated 30:1 lysozyme:AuNP (with variables added after baking) at 37°C, room temperature 30:1 lysozyme:AuNP (with variables added after baking), and cooled 30:1 lysozyme:AuNP (with variables added after baking) at 4°C.

Images

Conductivity Readings of 30:1 Lysozyme-AuNP Samples with Variables Added After Baking

  • Note that water had to be added to the solutions to bring the volume up to 11ml. This was done because the sensor could take a measurement if we had a volume less than 12.

UV-Vis Lyso 30:1

  • Upon further inspection it appears that the tubes for 2,2 Bipyridine were mislabeled with different concentrators of variable than used in other tests. We were supposed to use .09, .9, and 9mM of variable. As a result, I'm not sure if the concentrations of variable are accurate or are just a mistake in labeling. This experiment should be repeated again. For the sake of data analysis the concentrations listed on the tubes were used for data analysis and appear in the table below.

  • Note that dilution of the control was not necessary. We realized afterwards that the control used to make this graph was not diluted like the variable samples, as a result, the actual absorbance at the peak is closer to were the peak with variable is. The table represented above reflects this dilution and made the calculations accordingly.