journal menu
![[Figure 6]](wa5131fig6mag.jpg)
|
|
Figure 6
An analysis of how the addition of different common cryoprotectant compounds to a series of crystallization solutions changes their chip–solution contact angle. (a) Example images of contact-angle measurements for a thaumatin crystallization buffer without (1) and with (2 and 3) different cryoprotectants. (b) A comparison of the effects that different cryoprotectants have on the chip–solution contact angle of three different protein crystallization buffers (see Table 3 ![[link]](../../../../../../logos/arrows/d_arr.gif) ). The measurements corresponding to the images in (a) have been labeled. The mean and 95% confidence limits of each measurement have been plotted. The asterisks indicate the significance of the p-value obtained from a one-way ANOVA comparison between the `no cryo' buffer and the buffer plus an additive (*, <0.0332; **, <0.0021; ***, <0.0002; ****, <0.0001). |
![[Figure 6]](wa5131fig6.jpg)
 | STRUCTURAL BIOLOGY |
ISSN: 2059-7983
Open 
access
access
