BME100 f2015:Group8 1030amL2

From OpenWetWare

Jump to: navigation, search
BME 100 Fall 2015 Home
People
Lab Write-Up 1 | Lab Write-Up 2 | Lab Write-Up 3
Lab Write-Up 4 | Lab Write-Up 5 | Lab Write-Up 6
Course Logistics For Instructors
Photos
Wiki Editing Help
Image:BME494_Asu_logo.png


Contents

OUR TEAM

Name: Sydney Connor
Name: Sydney Connor
Name: Tajinder Virdee
Name: Tajinder Virdee
Name: Michael Dagher
Name: Michael Dagher
Name: Olivia Gonzalez
Name: Olivia Gonzalez
Name: Alaina Jenish
Name: Alaina Jenish
Name: Angela Hemesath
Name: Angela Hemesath

LAB 2 WRITE-UP

Descriptive Statistics

Human Experiment

Image:BME100WB8_TreatmentNumbers.jpg


Rat Experiment

Image:Group8ratgraph.JPG Image:Group8averagerat.JPG



Results

Human Experiment

Image:BMEWG8-Average_Human_Reaction_NO_STAR.JPG

Rat Experiment


Image:BME100WG8-RatReaction.jpg



Analysis

Human Experiment
Because the human experiment involved 4 different groups, a t-test cannot be used, since t-tests are only able to compare 2 different groups. So, an ANOVA (analysis of variance) must be used, since this enables the comparison of 3 or more groups in an experiment.
Image:BME100WG8-AnovaTest.jpg

Because the p-value is less than 0.05, the data is significant, and Individual Comparisons with Bonferroni Correction must be done.

Image:BME100WG8-Signifigance.jpg



After comparing each of the groups to one another using an unpaired, two-tailed t-test, it was found that all of the groups were statistically significant, since their p-value was much less than the corrected p-value (0.05/number of groups) needed for them to be statistically significant. The graph below represents this statistical significance with bars and "*" for each group.

Image:BME100WG8-HumanReaction.jpg


Rat Experiment
The rat test only has 2 groups to compare, therefore a t-test must be used to determine significance. Using a two-tailed, unpaired t-test, the following p-value was found:
p=0.867403
This p-value is much higher than the p-value of 0.05, which does not indicate statistical significance. Therefore, the rat experiment found no significant difference between the rats with 0 mg and 10 mg of the drug and the measured levels of Inflammotin. Therefore in the graph below, there is no indication of significance due to the datas lack of significance.

Image:BME100WG8-RatReaction.jpg




Summary/Discussion

Summary/Discussion:

Human - The average Inflammotin for the control group was 3.8341.52301 pg/mL. The individuals who took 5mg of the drug had an average of 8.9321.593932 pg/mL Inflammotin. The average Inflammotin for the individuals who took 10mg of the drug was 61.62230.11069 pg/mL. The individuals who took 15mg of the drug had an average of 657.941212.943 pg/mL Inflammotin. As the dosage of the drug administered to the individuals increased, the level of Inflammotin also increased. The data is statistically significant at the 95% confidence level, thus indicating that there is a positive relationship between the dosage of LPS and the levels of Inflammotin.


Rats - The average Inflammotin for the control group (that did not take the drug) was 10.5162.22555162 pg/mL. The rats that took 10mg of the drug had an average of 11.1127.40288592pg/mL Inflammotin in their system. The level of Inflammotin was greater in the rats that took the drug. The data is not statistically significant at the 95% confidence level. Therefore the data suggests that there is no relationship between the dosage of LPS and the level of Inflammotin in rats.


Comparison - In both studies, there was an increase in in inflammation with the increased dosage of Inflammotin. The human subjects showed a much larger increase in inflammation than the rats did. The humans showed a more significant reaction to the drug than the rats did within the same parameters. Although the data collected on the rats was not statistically significant more data could be collected in further experimentation.

Personal tools