OPEN ACCESS pISSN 2234-3806
eISSN 2234-3814

Fig. 1.

Download original image

Fig. 1. Comparison of %yield and correlation between isolation and processing methods: elution, bead volume, and vacuum effects (A). Elution protocol for column-based isolation (50 µL twice, N=15; 100 µL once, N=14; *P<0.05) (B). %yield level in magnetic bead-based isolation with bead volume 50 µL vs. 75 µL vs. 100 µL (bead 50 µL, N=10, bead 75 µL, N=13; bead 100 µL, N=12, P<0.001) (C) %yield level in sample preparation with input poly(A) vs. non-poly(A) in magnetic bead-based isolation (input poly(A), N=26, non-poly(A), N=9, P>0.05) (D) %yield of column-based isolation and magnetic bead-based isolation (column-based, N=21; magnetic bead-based, N=20; P<0.0001) (E). Column-based isolation %yield level in before vs. after vacuum treatment (before, N=29; after, N=29; P<0.0001) (F). Magnetic bead-based isolation %yield level before vs. after vacuum treatment (before N=35; after N=35; P<0.0001) (G). Comparison of average size before vs. after vacuum concentration (ICC (2, 1)=0.78, 95% CI=0.19–0.91).
Abbreviations: CB, column-based method; MB, magnetic bead-based method; ICC, intraclass coefficient correlation.
Ann Lab Med 2024;44:294~298 https://doi.org/10.3343/alm.2023.0267

© Ann Lab Med