Mario -
You got me on this one. I will look at it closer soon.
The greater effect on beads compared to cells is due to the greater
homogeneity of the bead scatter signal.
Marty
>>The "Dim cell stain" shows this artifact on dimly staining cells
>>(IF-gamma). The columns are as above. There is about a 5% decrease in
>>the percent positive - in this case not a significant change.
>>However, for other instruments, this may be greater (or less).
>
>Actually, there's no change. The number of events in the first
>sample, 2902, times the percentage, 5.27, is 145. The error in
>counting 145 events is ±12, or about 8.5 percent. Thus, the
>precision on the 5.27% positive is ±0.44. Simple counting statistics
>says you've done just as well.... to imply otherwise ("this may be
>greater"; "The dim cell stain shows this artifact") is misleading, if
>not outright wrong.
>
>Since this is a common error in many peoples' analyses, I think it
>would be great for you to "clarify" this one and explain the
>statistics. You really should have collected a bunch more events.
>
>As for the rest, it is indeed interesting. I wish you had collected
>some replicates to get some statistics on the cells. Why is it that
>the beads show such a much greater effect than the cells?
>
>mr
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Jan 05 2003 - 19:01:26 EST