DebRD_ATL said:Start from the measurement rather than the conclusion.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. Order of operations matters more than any single choice here: establish a baseline, change one thing, wait long enough for it to express itself, then measure again under the same conditions.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason. In three months the reason is what you will have forgotten, and the reason is what makes the record worth having.
Following on from DebRD_ATL — and this may be the naive question:
What did you change at the same time, and can you separate the two now?
Sigma-Aldrich — Research-Grade Standards
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference StandardsHPLC_Greg said:Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.
I read this differently. The confidence in this thread is running ahead of the evidence, and I would rather the uncertainty were stated than smoothed over because it is unsatisfying.
HPLC_Greg said:Practical: whatever you change, write down the date and the reason.
True, with the qualification that this is a self-selected group. The people for whom it did not work post less, and that shapes everything we think we know.
That is the short version; the long version is somebody else's post.