Size exclusion chromatography write up (discussion)

[vanklik]

I'm doing the biochemistry practical write up and I need to discuss the results including suggestions for improvement and sources of error noted.

The practical was about size exclusion chromatography. I separated mixture of gelatine and glucose into 20 fractions and did Benedict's and Biuret tests to confirm the results that were recorded based on the ammount of substance using the scheme:

0 - none

1 - trace

2 - little

and so on.

I'm really struggling with finding the sources of error. Could it be broken protein molecules? Or may be errors could happen because I was qualifying the substunces but not quantifying?

What could be done to improve experiment?

I understant that from the information that I gave here it probably will be very difficult to answer my question but any help will be greatly appreciated!

Thank you!

 

Sorry for my English, it's my second language and I'm still learning.

[CharonY]

Please start off by stating what you expected to see. Take into account how size exclusion works (i.e. according to what parameters does it separate) and how gelatine and glucose differ in the respective parameter.

[vanklik]

Please start off by stating what you expected to see. Take into account how size exclusion works (i.e. according to what parameters does it separate) and how gelatine and glucose differ in the respective parameter.

 

Thanks for your help. I did explain my results. I need to say about the sources of error and I can't think of any. Also I need to explain how I could improve the experiment.

[Psycho]

One obvious way to improve your experiment is to give meaningful results, currently your graph doesn't show anything other than they have separated, how could you change that?

[iNow]

Potential sources of error come from your method of separation, the tests you performed, any lack of sterility in your equipment, purity (or lack thereof) of the original samples, etc. Think along those lines when considering sources of potential error. Your suggestion about qualifying instead of quantifying also would be useful in this regard.

 

Most of the time, when writing papers of this nature, identifying sources of error is mostly about acknowledging things you could have done better, and openly discussing potential flaws in your methodology, and suggesting to researchers in the future who may attempt to repeat your experiment how they may improve upon it.

 

 

Btw - Your english is fine. Don't worry about that.

[vanklik]

One obvious way to improve your experiment is to give meaningful results, currently your graph doesn't show anything other than they have separated, how could you change that?

 

The funny thing is that's all results I've got. We separated gelatine and glucose, and described how much of each present in the tubes using the scale from 1 to 5. That was it. Now we need to write a proper scientific paper about this experiment.

I don't understand how can I improve that experiment but I thought it's because I'm stupid

---

Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Potential sources of error come from your method of separation, the tests you performed, any lack of sterility in your equipment, purity (or lack thereof) of the original samples, etc. Think along those lines when considering sources of potential error. Your suggestion about qualifying instead of quantifying also would be useful in this regard.

 

Most of the time, when writing papers of this nature, identifying sources of error is mostly about acknowledging things you could have done better, and openly discussing potential flaws in your methodology, and suggesting to researchers in the future who may attempt to repeat your experiment how they may improve upon it.

 

 

Btw - Your english is fine. Don't worry about that.

 

Thank you for your help! I will try and think about it again.

[Psycho]

The funny thing is that's all results I've got. We separated gelatine and glucose, and described how much of each present in the tubes using the scale from 1 to 5. That was it. Now we need to write a proper scientific paper about this experiment.

I don't understand how can I improve that experiment but I thought it's because I'm stupid

 

It doesn't matter that they are all the results you have got, the idea of an improvement is to make you data better, whether or not you can actually do the additional work or not, as in the real scientific world presuming the equipment was available you would.

 

You can quite easily add extra steps to an experiment using different equipment and it still be one experiment, for example how would you find out how much of each of the products you have or there purity or the percentage yield and then how would you improve these factor once you have established what they are.

[vanklik]

You can quite easily add extra steps to an experiment using different equipment and it still be one experiment, for example how would you find out how much of each of the products you have or there purity or the percentage yield and then how would you improve these factor once you have established what they are.

 

Thank you so much! I have no idea how to do all that as I only started my extended degree few months ago (just basic biology staff) but I will try and read my books At least now I know what I'm looking for!

[CharonY]

Wait, wait wait. Writing up a lab protocol only requires the discussion of sources of errors during the experiment. Proposing a different experiment is not discussion but rather something like an outlook.

The data itself does not say much, of course. the only thing you may want to look at is what one would refer to peak focusing. I.e. how collect your samples in less fractions to improve the resolution.