Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Dec 17.
Published in final edited form as: J Comput Aided Mol Des. 2015 Dec 17;29(12):1073–1086. doi: 10.1007/s10822-015-9888-6

FIG. 5. Modeled accumulation of random and systematic error in creating dilution series with fixed tips and acoustic dispensing.

FIG. 5

The model predicts how errors in compound concentration, well volume, and compound quantity accumulate for a dilution series prepared using fixed tips neglecting dilution effects (left) or including dilution effects (middle) compared with an acoustic direct-dispensing process (right). Imprecision and inaccuracy parameters appropriate for a Tecan Genesis (fixed tips dispensing) or Labcyte Echo (acoustic dispensing) were used, and assume that the initial compound stocks had negligible concentration error; see text for more details. The top panels show the average relative random error via the coefficient of variation (CV) of concentration, volume, or quantity, while the bottom panels depict the relative bias (RB); both quantities are expressed as a percentage. For tip-based dispensing, relative random concentration error (CV) accumulates with dilution number, while for acoustic dispensing, this is constant over all dilutions. When the dilution effect is included for fixed tips, there is significant bias accumulation over the dilution series. Note that the CV and RB shown for acoustic dispensing are for the final assay solutions, since no intermediate dilution series is created.