Accuracy in analytical microbiology

AI Thread Summary
Microbiological and biochemical analytics often exhibit a lower degree of precision compared to fields like chemistry, primarily due to the inherent variability in biological systems. The focus in microbiology is typically on organism identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing, which do not demand the same level of accuracy as chemical analyses, such as blood lipid measurements. Many microbiological tests are rapid and rely on specific biochemical reactions or growth methods for identification, which can lead to results that are more suggestive rather than absolute. Factors such as the stability of proteins and nucleotides under varying conditions also contribute to this variability, highlighting the need for careful handling to avoid inaccuracies. Overall, while microbiological analysis may seem less precise, it is tailored to the complexities of biological systems and the practicalities of clinical testing.
Nkb
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone.

I'm studying to become a laboratory analyst and I've recently began my studies in microbiology.
My studies began with chemistry and now that the focus in my studies has shifted to microbiology for a bit, I see a sudden drop in required accuracy in results of our analysis. I'm not sure if it's because of the easy-going attitude of some of my teachers or something else.

Is microbiological or biochemical analytics "less accurate" in general?
As in does it involve so many other variables in the calculations of macromolecule concentrations or in growth of bacterial colonies and such so all results are more or less suggestive in analysis and can't be taken as an "absolute truth"?
I know that most of the proteins and nucleotides shatter quite easily if exposed to mechanical damage and/or slightly higher temperatures but most of the time it requires you to be quite careless to actually screw up.


Apologies for any spelling mistakes, english isn't my native language :)
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Nkb said:
Hello everyone.

I'm studying to become a laboratory analyst and I've recently began my studies in microbiology.
My studies began with chemistry and now that the focus in my studies has shifted to microbiology for a bit, I see a sudden drop in required accuracy in results of our analysis. I'm not sure if it's because of the easy-going attitude of some of my teachers or something else.

Is microbiological or biochemical analytics "less accurate" in general?
As in does it involve so many other variables in the calculations of macromolecule concentrations or in growth of bacterial colonies and such so all results are more or less suggestive in analysis and can't be taken as an "absolute truth"?
I know that most of the proteins and nucleotides shatter quite easily if exposed to mechanical damage and/or slightly higher temperatures but most of the time it requires you to be quite careless to actually screw up.


Apologies for any spelling mistakes, english isn't my native language :)

The main purpose of analytical micro, or rather clinical/medical microbiology is organism identification and antimicrobial susceptibility testing. In general, this does not require the degree of precession as say, measuring blood lipid levels or a complete metabolic panel.

Most tests in commercial and hospital micro labs are rapid tests that rely on the high specificity of base pairing (like rapid strep tests for example) or traditional ways of growth and identification (via biochemical tests, either through card chambers as offered on machines like a Vitek or even more traditionally on agar plates).
 
Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S. According to articles in the Los Angeles Times, "Chagas disease, long considered only a threat abroad, is established in California and the Southern U.S.", and "Kissing bugs bring deadly disease to California". LA Times requires a subscription. Related article -...
I am reading Nicholas Wade's book A Troublesome Inheritance. Please let's not make this thread a critique about the merits or demerits of the book. This thread is my attempt to understanding the evidence that Natural Selection in the human genome was recent and regional. On Page 103 of A Troublesome Inheritance, Wade writes the following: "The regional nature of selection was first made evident in a genomewide scan undertaken by Jonathan Pritchard, a population geneticist at the...
I use ethanol for cleaning glassware and resin 3D prints. The glassware is sometimes used for food. If possible, I'd prefer to only keep one grade of ethanol on hand. I've made sugar mash, but that is hardly the least expensive feedstock for ethanol. I had given some thought to using wheat flour, and for this I would need a source for amylase enzyme (relevant data, but not the core question). I am now considering animal feed that I have access to for 20 cents per pound. This is a...
Back
Top