TinaHashiRN said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
Adding the part of the answer the thread has not reached. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.
Adding the numbers, since they settle part of this. One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number. A figure without its method cannot be checked, and an unchecked figure is how this community accumulates folklore.
Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.
One thing that is still open after TinaHashiRN’s answer:
How long did you give it before you decided it was working?
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference Standardsjosh_phd_bmore said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
This is where I part company with the consensus forming above. The objection nobody has made: this only works if the measurement is doing what we assume it is doing, and that assumption has not been tested here.
I would rather be corrected than agreed with, if it comes to it.
OP back with an update, since a thread like this is useless without one.
Resolved, and the thing that resolved it was the least interesting suggestion in the thread. Writing that down for the next person who wants the interesting answer.