jcs1086

Hi, This is my first post but I have been reading a lot of the posts and discussions for a while and I get a lot out of this forum, however, now I need help Brief details of assignment: The task is to produce a research grant application (honours level) with pre-specified manipulations, mine including guinea pigs as the animal and exposure to infection as the manip. This is what I have so far as my aims: The objective of the study is to assess the preventative benefit of a single pre-infection dose of TSLP in guinea pigs against the pathogenicity and virulence of the H5N1 strain of Avian flu. a) Further investigate the effects that the varying dosages of TSLP have on the guinea pig adaptive immune system, specifically on influenza specific cd8+ T cells. b) Assess whether administration methods affect the preventative capability of TSLP. c) Assess the preventative benefit of TSLP against transmission of TSLP. Method: each group gets innoculated and infected (dose/placebo as per below table) with tslp inoc at day 0, infected at day 7, then re infected at day 21, with appropriate measurements and analysis of tissue samples etc etc. This is what I have so far for my treatment groups: (See image below) Abbrvs: IN = intranasal, ID: intradermal I am having trouble designing the experiment to minimise variability. I so far plan on using a randomised block design My questions are as follows: 1. How would I house the animals? Would it be a design flaw to house only animals undergoing the same treatment in the same cage? Ie treatment group 1 in cage 1 (or split between cages), as long as all the cages had the same environmental conditions, feed etc. 2. Are the treatment groups designed well enough minimise variability? 3. My power analyse (with power set at .9, effect at .4, error at .01) suggested sample groups of 25 have I done the power analysis correctly? 4. I plan on sacrificing 2 guinea pigs from each group at a) prior to innoculation w tslp, b) at day 5 post inoc, c) prior to 1st infection, d) at days 5 and 9 post infection, e) prior to secondary infection and f) at days 5 and 9 post secondary infection for analysis of lung, spleen and lymph tissue to assess immune response, infection etc. Would this get ethical approval? I know thats a lot and I appreciate any feedback at all, Ill be active as much as I can to answer any questions or have a discussion with anyone. Thank you again! I need to nail this Just realised that the table didnt post properly, here is a jpg of it instead