The longer incubation didn’t have much of an effect on the absorbance rate of ampicillin as it stayed around .2 and that absorbance rate for DMSO was close to what we had for the other experiments we preformed. We excluded the data because the results we had from the diluted concentrations showed that only the stock concentration was a “hit” while the other concentrations all had an absorbance rate of .22. We redid the experiment to see if the absorbance rates would be different at 24 hours rather than 48 and they were.
I don’t think the differences between the lab protocol vs the regular protocol caused our data to change. For the bactericidal/bacteriostatic experiment, I believe that the absorbance results would have still shown that Plicamycin was effective in killing the bacteria because it had shown in the dilution series that it was very effective at it’s max dose. The agar plate just visually showed that it was effective rather than statistically.
I’m not exactly sure if this answers your question correctly, but plicamycin is produced from a microorganism called Streptomyces plicatus. Hopefully that helps!
Hi Peyton. Plicamycin isn’t used currently as an antibiotic as it was discontinued in 2000 but we wanted to test to see at what concentration plicamycin was effective in killing Salmonella. We tested plicamycin because in a previous semester it was proven to be effective in killing Salmonella and we wanted to confirm their results.
We chose this compound because it was proven in a previous lab that it was effective in killing Salmonella. So the bacteria was Salmonella when we were choosing what compound we wanted to use.
How do you think the longer incubation problem effected the ampicillin absorbance rate?
The longer incubation didn’t have much of an effect on the absorbance rate of ampicillin as it stayed around .2 and that absorbance rate for DMSO was close to what we had for the other experiments we preformed. We excluded the data because the results we had from the diluted concentrations showed that only the stock concentration was a “hit” while the other concentrations all had an absorbance rate of .22. We redid the experiment to see if the absorbance rates would be different at 24 hours rather than 48 and they were.
Do you think that the differences you had in your lab protocol than the regular protocols caused for your data to be skewed one way or another?
I don’t think the differences between the lab protocol vs the regular protocol caused our data to change. For the bactericidal/bacteriostatic experiment, I believe that the absorbance results would have still shown that Plicamycin was effective in killing the bacteria because it had shown in the dilution series that it was very effective at it’s max dose. The agar plate just visually showed that it was effective rather than statistically.
Do you know anything about how Plicamycin is synthesized?
I’m not exactly sure if this answers your question correctly, but plicamycin is produced from a microorganism called Streptomyces plicatus. Hopefully that helps!
Why did you test plicamycin if it is already used as an antibiotic?
Hi Peyton. Plicamycin isn’t used currently as an antibiotic as it was discontinued in 2000 but we wanted to test to see at what concentration plicamycin was effective in killing Salmonella. We tested plicamycin because in a previous semester it was proven to be effective in killing Salmonella and we wanted to confirm their results.
What bacteria was the Plicamycin used against when you were first choosing your compound?
We chose this compound because it was proven in a previous lab that it was effective in killing Salmonella. So the bacteria was Salmonella when we were choosing what compound we wanted to use.