Skip to main content
. 2009 Jul 3;5(7):e1000420. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000420

Table 3. Fitted values for the curves in Figure 1 and Figure 2.

Relationship Estimated parameters R-square p.value
Inline graphic vs Inline graphic Inline graphic 0.97 Inline graphic
Inline graphic 0.83 0.0109
Inline graphic 0.96 Inline graphic
Inline graphic 0.04 Inline graphic
Inline graphic 0.97 Inline graphic
Inline graphic vs Inline graphic Inline graphic 0.69 0.01
Inline graphic 0.41 0.0848
Inline graphic 0.67 0.0123
Inline graphic 0.53 0.0104
Inline graphic 0.7 0.0093
Inline graphic vs Inline graphic Inline graphic 0.87 0.0069

The linear and non linear relationships, with and without the intercept, for Inline graphic and Inline graphic are reported here. These models are fitted to the experimental measurements listed in Table 2. For each model the fitting parameters, Inline graphic and the correlation p-value are reported. When Inline graphic and Inline graphic are related to Inline graphic, the non linear model with a fixed intercept and a free exponent (i.e. Inline graphic) is associated with the best fitting results (bold). By adding one more free parameter (i.e. Inline graphic) we do not get essentially any improvement (italic). The estimated Inline graphic value for Inline graphic, without any simplification, implies Inline graphic, Inline graphic and Inline graphic (see Materials and Methods). A direct proportionality is observed also for Inline graphic.