User:Andy Maloney/Notebook/Lab Notebook of Andy Maloney/2010/11/03/Water isotope study: Difference between revisions
Andy Maloney (talk | contribs) |
Andy Maloney (talk | contribs) |
||
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
==18% 3rd try== | ==18% 3rd try== | ||
Again with the bad 1st ROI. | Again with the bad 1st ROI. | ||
==36% 2nd try== | |||
No problems here. | |||
==36% 3rd try== | |||
Yeah. Almost done. | |||
==27% 3rd try== | |||
No problems. | |||
==54% 2nd try== | |||
Same issue with the 1st ROI. | |||
==54% 3rd try== | |||
Same motility solution as the one above. |
Latest revision as of 17:42, 3 November 2010
9% O-PEM 3rd try
Final assay run for the 9% guy. No problems at all.
45% 2nd try
Again, there is breakups in the 1st ROI. I moved to a different FOV and things are moving better. Some breaking going on but, definitely not as bad as the first FOV.
The 2nd ROI looks great. Except near the end of the time.
I'm not sure what is going on with the breakings. So, I moved the slide a decent amount away from the 1st and 2nd ROI. Still in the center of the flow cell however.
No problems here in the 3rd ROI. I do see one MT that has a tail on its minus end which is uncharacteristic.
45% 3rd try
Using the same motility assay as in the 2nd run. No real problems here.
81% 3rd try
Three different days, two different kinesin aliquots. I did have to stop this assay between the 1st and 2nd ROIs because I didn't put the slide on the holder properly. This lead to a portion of the FOV to be blurry.
Yeah. I'm super happy the computer decided to crash while I was taking data. No bother, just the last 2 data points I'm going to redo.
72% 2nd try
No problems.
72% 3rd try
No problems except the 1st ROI.
18% 3rd try
Again with the bad 1st ROI.
36% 2nd try
No problems here.
36% 3rd try
Yeah. Almost done.
27% 3rd try
No problems.
54% 2nd try
Same issue with the 1st ROI.
54% 3rd try
Same motility solution as the one above.