{"title":"牛和山羊血清总蛋白测量中生物尿素法和折射仪法的比较","authors":"Sileshi Mesele Mesa, Yoseph Cherinet Megerssa","doi":"10.1186/s13104-024-06906-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The biuret method is frequently used to determine serum total protein. On the other hand refractometer, a quicker and less expensive option, is available to determine serum total protein. However, there is no study conducted in Ethiopia to compare serum total protein measurement in veterinary settings. Therefore, this study was conducted to compare the serum total protein concentration measurement in cattle and goats obtained by the biuret method and refractometer.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Serum samples from 60 cattle and 60 goats were assayed by both methods and data were analyzed with a paired t-test, Pearson's correlation, and Bland-Altman plots. There was a strong positive correlation between the total protein values determined with the refractometer and the biuret method in cattle (r = 0.93) and goats (r = 0.97). There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in the protein values measured with the refractometer and those evaluated with the biuret method in both species. Bland-Altman plots showed that biases indicating the analytic and user error were 8.33% in both species which is below the acceptable total error (< 10%). Thus, refractometer can be used in place of biuret method since it is valid enough to measure serum total protein in cattle and goats.</p>","PeriodicalId":9234,"journal":{"name":"BMC Research Notes","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11342500/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparison of biuret and refractometery method for serum total protein measurements in cattle and goat.\",\"authors\":\"Sileshi Mesele Mesa, Yoseph Cherinet Megerssa\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s13104-024-06906-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The biuret method is frequently used to determine serum total protein. On the other hand refractometer, a quicker and less expensive option, is available to determine serum total protein. However, there is no study conducted in Ethiopia to compare serum total protein measurement in veterinary settings. Therefore, this study was conducted to compare the serum total protein concentration measurement in cattle and goats obtained by the biuret method and refractometer.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Serum samples from 60 cattle and 60 goats were assayed by both methods and data were analyzed with a paired t-test, Pearson's correlation, and Bland-Altman plots. There was a strong positive correlation between the total protein values determined with the refractometer and the biuret method in cattle (r = 0.93) and goats (r = 0.97). There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in the protein values measured with the refractometer and those evaluated with the biuret method in both species. Bland-Altman plots showed that biases indicating the analytic and user error were 8.33% in both species which is below the acceptable total error (< 10%). Thus, refractometer can be used in place of biuret method since it is valid enough to measure serum total protein in cattle and goats.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9234,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Research Notes\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11342500/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Research Notes\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-024-06906-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Research Notes","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-024-06906-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Comparison of biuret and refractometery method for serum total protein measurements in cattle and goat.
Objectives: The biuret method is frequently used to determine serum total protein. On the other hand refractometer, a quicker and less expensive option, is available to determine serum total protein. However, there is no study conducted in Ethiopia to compare serum total protein measurement in veterinary settings. Therefore, this study was conducted to compare the serum total protein concentration measurement in cattle and goats obtained by the biuret method and refractometer.
Results: Serum samples from 60 cattle and 60 goats were assayed by both methods and data were analyzed with a paired t-test, Pearson's correlation, and Bland-Altman plots. There was a strong positive correlation between the total protein values determined with the refractometer and the biuret method in cattle (r = 0.93) and goats (r = 0.97). There were no significant differences (p > 0.05) in the protein values measured with the refractometer and those evaluated with the biuret method in both species. Bland-Altman plots showed that biases indicating the analytic and user error were 8.33% in both species which is below the acceptable total error (< 10%). Thus, refractometer can be used in place of biuret method since it is valid enough to measure serum total protein in cattle and goats.
BMC Research NotesBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology-Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology (all)
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
363
审稿时长
15 weeks
期刊介绍:
BMC Research Notes publishes scientifically valid research outputs that cannot be considered as full research or methodology articles. We support the research community across all scientific and clinical disciplines by providing an open access forum for sharing data and useful information; this includes, but is not limited to, updates to previous work, additions to established methods, short publications, null results, research proposals and data management plans.