A series of cell culture samples, each expected to have different Ca^+2 expressi

Question

A series of cell culture samples, each expected to have different Ca^+2 expression levels due to their different states of hypoxia, were analyzed using two different techniques; fluorescence ativated cell sorting (FACS) and fluorescence resonance energy transfer (FRET). The results of the Ca^+2 expression levels from the FACS analyses provided values of

Sample 1= 3.2 mM

Sample 2= 12.8 mM

Sample 3= 7.3 mM

Sample 4= 1.0 mM

Sample 5= 5.4 mM

Sample 6= 6.1 mM

Sample 7= 2.2 mM

The results from the FRET analyses for the exact same 7 samples revealed values of;

Sample 1= 2.8 mM

Sample 2= 12.6 mM

Sample 3= 7.7 mM

Sample 4= 1.2 mM

Sample 5= 5.5 mM

Sample 6= 5.6 mM

Sample 7= 2.7 mM

Based on these results , is the accuracy of the FRET analysis method the same as that of the FACS analysis method at the 95% confidence level? (Show calculation)

Explanation / Answer

Ho : Mean (FACS) = Mean (FRET)

Ha : Both the means are different

We carry out t-stat test. The calculation is shown in the tabular format

Since the two tailed critical value (2.4469) is greater than calculated t-stat ( -0.0971), the null hypothesis can't be rejected.

Thus, we can say that the two tests give the same results.

Hope this helps. Ask if you don't understand anything.

Sample FACS FRET 1 3.2 2.8 2 12.8 12.6 3 7.3 7.7 4 1 1.2 5 5.4 5.5 6 6.1 5.6 7 2.2 2.7 t-Test: Paired Two Sample for Means FACS FRET Mean 5.429 5.443 Variance 15.549 14.810 Observations 7 7 Pearson Correlation 0.995 Hypothesized Mean Difference 0 df 6 t Stat -0.0971 P(T<=t) one-tail 0.4629 t Critical one-tail 1.9432 P(T<=t) two-tail 0.9258 t Critical two-tail 2.4469

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse A
• Subjects

---

---

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.