We compare several different methods to quantify the uncertainty of binding parameters estimated from isothermal titration calorimetry data: the asymptotic standard error from maximum likelihood estimation, error propagation based on a first-order Taylor series expansion, and the Bayesian credible interval. When the methods are applied to simulated experiments and to measurements of Mg(II) binding to EDTA, the asymptotic standard error underestimates the uncertainty in the free energy and enthalpy of binding. Error propagation overestimates the uncertainty for both quantities, except in the simulations, where it underestimates the uncertainty of enthalpy for confidence intervals less than 70%. In both datasets, Bayesian credible intervals are much closer to observed confidence intervals.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10606514PMC
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijms242015074DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

error propagation
12
uncertainty binding
8
binding parameters
8
isothermal titration
8
titration calorimetry
8
asymptotic standard
8
standard error
8
bayesian credible
8
underestimates uncertainty
8
confidence intervals
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!