a*a
2 楼
从屏幕到dial，都是针对搞设计的专业人士的。马工根本用不到那么大色域的屏幕，也
用不到touch，所以看看就好了。过个一年半载，可能出个低配版让大家玩玩。
至于价格为什么那么高大上，软软要是都白菜价，oem还活不活了？ surface的目的不
是自己的市场占有率，而是推动整个pc产业。
用不到touch，所以看看就好了。过个一年半载，可能出个低配版让大家玩玩。
至于价格为什么那么高大上，软软要是都白菜价，oem还活不活了？ surface的目的不
是自己的市场占有率，而是推动整个pc产业。
f*o
3 楼
Cost 15.00.
Got the promotion code as I recently bought a new laptop. Note that you
could use the promotion code for any laptop. I tried it on my old T61 which
has a XX version win7, it still works.
All the x86 programs I need are working,such as PS, endnote, office 2012,
WinRAR, except some from lenove, such as power management. But win8 offer an
alternative one, which looks good.
Also just found that ie 10 could check the spelling in default.
Got the promotion code as I recently bought a new laptop. Note that you
could use the promotion code for any laptop. I tried it on my old T61 which
has a XX version win7, it still works.
All the x86 programs I need are working,such as PS, endnote, office 2012,
WinRAR, except some from lenove, such as power management. But win8 offer an
alternative one, which looks good.
Also just found that ie 10 could check the spelling in default.
s*y
4 楼
Sorry I cannot input Chinese today.
I have a question here. We had some old data for tumor growth on immune
compromised mice. When we did the experiments three years ago, we did two
different ways without thinking too much. In one way, we inject the test
cell and the control cell on the same mice (different side) in a paired
study. In another way, we inject the test cell and control cell on different
mice in a unpaired study.
When we analyze the data, we found that in the paired study, the test cells
always formed smaller tumor than the control cells injected on the same mice
. Therefore, the error bar is really good and the p value is excellent.
However, the n number for this group is smaller (n=5) because some mice died
in the course.
However, for the unpaired study, when the cells were injected in different
mice, the difference is not so clear because in a few out-liner mice where
the tumors for the test cells grow very, very big. Therefore, the error bar
is not very good. We suspect that when we injected the cells in different
mice, we unknowingly brought in the individual variation between different
mice. So now we are questioning whether we should show this group of data or
not? The n number for this group is 7.
So, for experts of mice xenograft, which dataset do you think we should use?
Also, do you think our n number is good enough? For the first method, even
though the n number is small, the p value is less than 0.01 because the
difference is very significant. But do you think the reviewer will have a
problem with the n number?
If we combine the two dataset together, we will get a n number of 12.
However the error bar doesn't look very good, but if we analyze the curve
with paired-t test, the p value is still OK.
I have a question here. We had some old data for tumor growth on immune
compromised mice. When we did the experiments three years ago, we did two
different ways without thinking too much. In one way, we inject the test
cell and the control cell on the same mice (different side) in a paired
study. In another way, we inject the test cell and control cell on different
mice in a unpaired study.
When we analyze the data, we found that in the paired study, the test cells
always formed smaller tumor than the control cells injected on the same mice
. Therefore, the error bar is really good and the p value is excellent.
However, the n number for this group is smaller (n=5) because some mice died
in the course.
However, for the unpaired study, when the cells were injected in different
mice, the difference is not so clear because in a few out-liner mice where
the tumors for the test cells grow very, very big. Therefore, the error bar
is not very good. We suspect that when we injected the cells in different
mice, we unknowingly brought in the individual variation between different
mice. So now we are questioning whether we should show this group of data or
not? The n number for this group is 7.
So, for experts of mice xenograft, which dataset do you think we should use?
Also, do you think our n number is good enough? For the first method, even
though the n number is small, the p value is less than 0.01 because the
difference is very significant. But do you think the reviewer will have a
problem with the n number?
If we combine the two dataset together, we will get a n number of 12.
However the error bar doesn't look very good, but if we analyze the curve
with paired-t test, the p value is still OK.
r*e
5 楼
这就艺术家了...还不如车后面贴得一群乌龟
【在 c*******7 的大作中提到】
: 倒霉的是小宝宝=。=
【在 c*******7 的大作中提到】
: 倒霉的是小宝宝=。=
a*1
6 楼
那个code是不是只能用一次？
我家有个非激活的版本不知道能不能用
我家有个非激活的版本不知道能不能用
s*y
7 楼
自己顶一下。有人知道么？肿瘤细胞需要和对照组一起打在同一个老鼠身上么？还是无
所谓乱打也可以？
error
【在 s******y 的大作中提到】
: Sorry I cannot input Chinese today.
: I have a question here. We had some old data for tumor growth on immune
: compromised mice. When we did the experiments three years ago, we did two
: different ways without thinking too much. In one way, we inject the test
: cell and the control cell on the same mice (different side) in a paired
: study. In another way, we inject the test cell and control cell on different
: mice in a unpaired study.
: When we analyze the data, we found that in the paired study, the test cells
: always formed smaller tumor than the control cells injected on the same mice
: . Therefore, the error bar is really good and the p value is excellent.
所谓乱打也可以？
error
【在 s******y 的大作中提到】
: Sorry I cannot input Chinese today.
: I have a question here. We had some old data for tumor growth on immune
: compromised mice. When we did the experiments three years ago, we did two
: different ways without thinking too much. In one way, we inject the test
: cell and the control cell on the same mice (different side) in a paired
: study. In another way, we inject the test cell and control cell on different
: mice in a unpaired study.
: When we analyze the data, we found that in the paired study, the test cells
: always formed smaller tumor than the control cells injected on the same mice
: . Therefore, the error bar is really good and the p value is excellent.
c*7
8 楼
=。=那个小宝宝就是给贴上去的。。。
【在 r*********e 的大作中提到】
: 这就艺术家了...还不如车后面贴得一群乌龟
【在 r*********e 的大作中提到】
: 这就艺术家了...还不如车后面贴得一群乌龟
f*o
9 楼
说是只能装一台机器。
我因为第一次装出了点问题，又重新安装过一次。所以code应该是可以多次用，不过只
能装一台机子。
我因为第一次装出了点问题，又重新安装过一次。所以code应该是可以多次用，不过只
能装一台机子。
r*i
10 楼
should be in the same mouse. Otherwise, how can you exclude the viability
among mice.
among mice.
f*o
11 楼
我说的可能不清楚，其实因为买了新电脑，去ms网站注册，26号就收到了promotion
code，用这个code买win 8pro只要15刀。
买的时候可以选dvd版，或者download 版，我选的download，所以ms又给我发了个key
，用这个key就可以激活win 8pro
code，用这个code买win 8pro只要15刀。
买的时候可以选dvd版，或者download 版，我选的download，所以ms又给我发了个key
，用这个key就可以激活win 8pro
r*i
12 楼
check sean morrison's nature in 2012. regarding cancer stem cell.
t*s
13 楼
我t60 都能刷。。。win8还不错。。。
which
an
【在 f**o 的大作中提到】
: Cost 15.00.
: Got the promotion code as I recently bought a new laptop. Note that you
: could use the promotion code for any laptop. I tried it on my old T61 which
: has a XX version win7, it still works.
: All the x86 programs I need are working,such as PS, endnote, office 2012,
: WinRAR, except some from lenove, such as power management. But win8 offer an
: alternative one, which looks good.
: Also just found that ie 10 could check the spelling in default.
which
an
【在 f**o 的大作中提到】
: Cost 15.00.
: Got the promotion code as I recently bought a new laptop. Note that you
: could use the promotion code for any laptop. I tried it on my old T61 which
: has a XX version win7, it still works.
: All the x86 programs I need are working,such as PS, endnote, office 2012,
: WinRAR, except some from lenove, such as power management. But win8 offer an
: alternative one, which looks good.
: Also just found that ie 10 could check the spelling in default.
s*y
14 楼
谢谢！
我们打在同一个老鼠身上的数据非常的好，对照组和实验组有很大的差别。但是乱打的
差别就会小一些。我再问一个傻问题，对于这种皮下肿瘤试验，n=? 是一个可以接受的
数值？ 我们有一个数据是n=6,另外一个数据是n=3 （汗，当时做这个试验的时候实在
是没有经验）。会不会被审稿者立刻把稿件扔我们脸上？
【在 r*****i 的大作中提到】
: should be in the same mouse. Otherwise, how can you exclude the viability
: among mice.
我们打在同一个老鼠身上的数据非常的好，对照组和实验组有很大的差别。但是乱打的
差别就会小一些。我再问一个傻问题，对于这种皮下肿瘤试验，n=? 是一个可以接受的
数值？ 我们有一个数据是n=6,另外一个数据是n=3 （汗，当时做这个试验的时候实在
是没有经验）。会不会被审稿者立刻把稿件扔我们脸上？
【在 r*****i 的大作中提到】
: should be in the same mouse. Otherwise, how can you exclude the viability
: among mice.
v*n
15 楼
T61 power management功能还是比win8自带的强很多，比如电池充电的设置，你装
lenovo的驱动就行，win7的，什么management engine之类的一堆
which
an
【在 f**o 的大作中提到】
: Cost 15.00.
: Got the promotion code as I recently bought a new laptop. Note that you
: could use the promotion code for any laptop. I tried it on my old T61 which
: has a XX version win7, it still works.
: All the x86 programs I need are working,such as PS, endnote, office 2012,
: WinRAR, except some from lenove, such as power management. But win8 offer an
: alternative one, which looks good.
: Also just found that ie 10 could check the spelling in default.
lenovo的驱动就行，win7的，什么management engine之类的一堆
which
an
【在 f**o 的大作中提到】
: Cost 15.00.
: Got the promotion code as I recently bought a new laptop. Note that you
: could use the promotion code for any laptop. I tried it on my old T61 which
: has a XX version win7, it still works.
: All the x86 programs I need are working,such as PS, endnote, office 2012,
: WinRAR, except some from lenove, such as power management. But win8 offer an
: alternative one, which looks good.
: Also just found that ie 10 could check the spelling in default.
s*y
16 楼
Thanks. Interesting paper.
【在 r*****i 的大作中提到】
: check sean morrison's nature in 2012. regarding cancer stem cell.
【在 r*****i 的大作中提到】
: check sean morrison's nature in 2012. regarding cancer stem cell.
r*i
17 楼
it depends on how familiar you and reviewers are, and how rare your samples
can be got.
Maybe you can explain this to the reviewers.
sometimes, we also have n=3.
【在 s******y 的大作中提到】
: 谢谢！
: 我们打在同一个老鼠身上的数据非常的好，对照组和实验组有很大的差别。但是乱打的
: 差别就会小一些。我再问一个傻问题，对于这种皮下肿瘤试验，n=? 是一个可以接受的
: 数值？ 我们有一个数据是n=6,另外一个数据是n=3 （汗，当时做这个试验的时候实在
: 是没有经验）。会不会被审稿者立刻把稿件扔我们脸上？
can be got.
Maybe you can explain this to the reviewers.
sometimes, we also have n=3.
【在 s******y 的大作中提到】
: 谢谢！
: 我们打在同一个老鼠身上的数据非常的好，对照组和实验组有很大的差别。但是乱打的
: 差别就会小一些。我再问一个傻问题，对于这种皮下肿瘤试验，n=? 是一个可以接受的
: 数值？ 我们有一个数据是n=6,另外一个数据是n=3 （汗，当时做这个试验的时候实在
: 是没有经验）。会不会被审稿者立刻把稿件扔我们脸上？
s*y
18 楼
我们原先不是做癌症起家的，所以根本不认识癌症领域里的任何人。
样品其实并不rare，但是那个实验是好几年前我还在前老板那里的时候做的了。
现在时过境迁，要重复一下挺麻烦的，主要是需要时间去重新弄那些细胞和老鼠。n=6
的样品和n=3的样品都是做同一个蛋白的，唯一不同的是测的两个不同isoform, 但是结
论都是一样的。
samples
【在 r*****i 的大作中提到】
: it depends on how familiar you and reviewers are, and how rare your samples
: can be got.
: Maybe you can explain this to the reviewers.
: sometimes, we also have n=3.
样品其实并不rare，但是那个实验是好几年前我还在前老板那里的时候做的了。
现在时过境迁，要重复一下挺麻烦的，主要是需要时间去重新弄那些细胞和老鼠。n=6
的样品和n=3的样品都是做同一个蛋白的，唯一不同的是测的两个不同isoform, 但是结
论都是一样的。
samples
【在 r*****i 的大作中提到】
: it depends on how familiar you and reviewers are, and how rare your samples
: can be got.
: Maybe you can explain this to the reviewers.
: sometimes, we also have n=3.
G*e
19 楼
那得谨慎
下结论的时候保守一点可能问题不大
我觉得同一只老鼠也有caveat
万一实验组对照组在体内遥控打架怎么办
比较呆在体内好几个礼拜
不过你也有不是同一只老鼠的数据支持
两种证据加起来其实很有说服力
这些体内实验可以在文章里面downplay一点，如果你不想重复的话。
你不下能被人攻击的结论自然没有人攻击你
体外实验是重点，可以故意摆几个漏洞让审稿人挑
让他们挑的津津有味
回来你补上就行了
瞎扯一下，别当真
肿瘤最无聊了，不喜欢
6
【在 s******y 的大作中提到】
: 我们原先不是做癌症起家的，所以根本不认识癌症领域里的任何人。
: 样品其实并不rare，但是那个实验是好几年前我还在前老板那里的时候做的了。
: 现在时过境迁，要重复一下挺麻烦的，主要是需要时间去重新弄那些细胞和老鼠。n=6
: 的样品和n=3的样品都是做同一个蛋白的，唯一不同的是测的两个不同isoform, 但是结
: 论都是一样的。
:
: samples
下结论的时候保守一点可能问题不大
我觉得同一只老鼠也有caveat
万一实验组对照组在体内遥控打架怎么办
比较呆在体内好几个礼拜
不过你也有不是同一只老鼠的数据支持
两种证据加起来其实很有说服力
这些体内实验可以在文章里面downplay一点，如果你不想重复的话。
你不下能被人攻击的结论自然没有人攻击你
体外实验是重点，可以故意摆几个漏洞让审稿人挑
让他们挑的津津有味
回来你补上就行了
瞎扯一下，别当真
肿瘤最无聊了，不喜欢
6
【在 s******y 的大作中提到】
: 我们原先不是做癌症起家的，所以根本不认识癌症领域里的任何人。
: 样品其实并不rare，但是那个实验是好几年前我还在前老板那里的时候做的了。
: 现在时过境迁，要重复一下挺麻烦的，主要是需要时间去重新弄那些细胞和老鼠。n=6
: 的样品和n=3的样品都是做同一个蛋白的，唯一不同的是测的两个不同isoform, 但是结
: 论都是一样的。
:
: samples
s*y
20 楼
谢谢。故意卖几个破绽这个建议很有新意啊，呵呵。
【在 G********e 的大作中提到】
: 那得谨慎
: 下结论的时候保守一点可能问题不大
: 我觉得同一只老鼠也有caveat
: 万一实验组对照组在体内遥控打架怎么办
: 比较呆在体内好几个礼拜
: 不过你也有不是同一只老鼠的数据支持
: 两种证据加起来其实很有说服力
: 这些体内实验可以在文章里面downplay一点，如果你不想重复的话。
: 你不下能被人攻击的结论自然没有人攻击你
: 体外实验是重点，可以故意摆几个漏洞让审稿人挑
【在 G********e 的大作中提到】
: 那得谨慎
: 下结论的时候保守一点可能问题不大
: 我觉得同一只老鼠也有caveat
: 万一实验组对照组在体内遥控打架怎么办
: 比较呆在体内好几个礼拜
: 不过你也有不是同一只老鼠的数据支持
: 两种证据加起来其实很有说服力
: 这些体内实验可以在文章里面downplay一点，如果你不想重复的话。
: 你不下能被人攻击的结论自然没有人攻击你
: 体外实验是重点，可以故意摆几个漏洞让审稿人挑
相关阅读
Re: is anyone use RNAi? can be use for any gene?Re: help me with cyclin D1 westernRe: 哪里可以查到各个cell lines的信息？？ 急，谢谢Re: 大侠请推荐 神经 的教科书Re: How is job market of bioinformatics/computational biology?Re: transcription activator -> regulated genesPCRLinks.com Home for PCR usersRe: 请教：GST fusion proteinRe: cloning help!Keep your hands off 32P. Re: Is 同位素 32P very dangerous?谈谈国内生物教育的弊端吧Re: 发高质量的文章什么因素最重要中国需要更多的帥才! Re: 谈谈国内生物教育的弊端吧paper help/ call for MCBJC discussionRe: 检测基因表达变化时，RT-PCR和Northern blot首选哪个？Engineered gene circuitsRe: how to know if biology fits you?Re: MCBJC, cellular neurobiology, Mar. 10, 2new paper on rice genomeRe: MCBJC, cell division, Jan 20 2003, by Assasin