Skip to main content
. 2021 Aug 23;77(Pt 9):1153–1167. doi: 10.1107/S2059798321007324

Figure 6.

Figure 6

An analysis of how the addition of different common cryoprotectant compounds to a series of crystallization solutions changes their chip–solution contact angle. (a) Example images of contact-angle measurements for a thaumatin crystallization buffer without (1) and with (2 and 3) different cryoprotectants. (b) A comparison of the effects that different cryoprotectants have on the chip–solution contact angle of three different protein crystallization buffers (see Table 3). The measurements corresponding to the images in (a) have been labeled. The mean and 95% confidence limits of each measurement have been plotted. The asterisks indicate the significance of the p-value obtained from a one-way ANOVA comparison between the ‘no cryo’ buffer and the buffer plus an additive (*, <0.0332; **, <0.0021; ***, <0.0002; ****, <0.0001).