The figures, for anyone assembling their own picture. 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.
Following on from TinaHashiRN — and this may be the naive question:
What would you measure differently if you were starting again?
jason_paloalto 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.
Certified reference materials, analytical reagents, and research-grade standards for peptide verification. Trusted by laboratories worldwide.
Shop Reference Standardsjason_paloalto said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
jason_paloalto has the substance of this right. The condition it depends on is worth stating. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.
jason_paloalto said:One habit that pays for itself: post the method alongside the number.
This is exactly what I could not find anywhere else.