Difference between revisions of "Team:UFSCar-Brasil/part3.html"
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
<p>The curve that better fitted the fluorescence standard curve points was the straight: | <p>The curve that better fitted the fluorescence standard curve points was the straight: | ||
(1) $$ F_{luo}=a[GFP]+b $$ | (1) $$ F_{luo}=a[GFP]+b $$ | ||
− | <p> Where the parameters a and b are constants, [GFP] is GFP concentrations given by nM and F_luo is fluorescence in u.a. </p> | + | <p> Where the parameters a and b are constants, [GFP] is GFP concentrations given by nM and F_luo is fluorescence in u.a. |
+ | imagem 1</p> | ||
+ | <p>The graph 1 fitting constants results and their respective uncertainties is described in table 1 on appendix (link). The result was: | ||
+ | (2) $$ F_{luo}=113[GFP]+94(2)$$ | ||
Revision as of 20:12, 15 September 2015
Part III
Frase de impacto
Curve fitting
Based on laboratory experiments was possible to plotting fluorescence standard curve as a function of GFP concentration (Green Fluorescent Protein). This adjustment was essential to facilitated the process of obtaining the GFP molecules number just using the fluorescence values obtained in lab.
The curve that better fitted the fluorescence standard curve points was the straight: (1) $$ F_{luo}=a[GFP]+b $$
Where the parameters a and b are constants, [GFP] is GFP concentrations given by nM and F_luo is fluorescence in u.a. imagem 1
The graph 1 fitting constants results and their respective uncertainties is described in table 1 on appendix (link). The result was: (2) $$ F_{luo}=113[GFP]+94(2)$$