Table 1. Open in new tab Factors... | Oxford Academic

Table 1.

Open in new tab

Factors Contributing to Erroneous Assumptions of Binding Affinity and Stoichiometry in Linear Models of Testosterone Binding to Its Cognate Binding Proteins

Contributing Factor
1:1 Binding stoichiometry assumed without supporting experimental data
Use of Scatchard plots to force a straight line through nonlinear experimental binding data
Failure to account for alteration of binding equilibria during separation of free and bound testosterone
Variations in the estimates of binding affinity because of differences in the temperature at which binding isotherms and dialysis experiments were performed
Variations in the estimates of binding affinity due to differences in dialysis conditions, including differences in the assay buffer composition and relative volumes of serum and assay buffers
Limited ability to detect additional binding sites on SHBG and HSA because of the narrow range of testosterone concentrations used in the binding experiments

Contributing Factor
1:1 Binding stoichiometry assumed without supporting experimental data
Use of Scatchard plots to force a straight line through nonlinear experimental binding data
Failure to account for alteration of binding equilibria during separation of free and bound testosterone
Variations in the estimates of binding affinity because of differences in the temperature at which binding isotherms and dialysis experiments were performed
Variations in the estimates of binding affinity due to differences in dialysis conditions, including differences in the assay buffer composition and relative volumes of serum and assay buffers
Limited ability to detect additional binding sites on SHBG and HSA because of the narrow range of testosterone concentrations used in the binding experiments

Table 1.

Open in new tab

Factors Contributing to Erroneous Assumptions of Binding Affinity and Stoichiometry in Linear Models of Testosterone Binding to Its Cognate Binding Proteins

Contributing Factor
1:1 Binding stoichiometry assumed without supporting experimental data
Use of Scatchard plots to force a straight line through nonlinear experimental binding data
Failure to account for alteration of binding equilibria during separation of free and bound testosterone
Variations in the estimates of binding affinity because of differences in the temperature at which binding isotherms and dialysis experiments were performed
Variations in the estimates of binding affinity due to differences in dialysis conditions, including differences in the assay buffer composition and relative volumes of serum and assay buffers
Limited ability to detect additional binding sites on SHBG and HSA because of the narrow range of testosterone concentrations used in the binding experiments

Contributing Factor
1:1 Binding stoichiometry assumed without supporting experimental data
Use of Scatchard plots to force a straight line through nonlinear experimental binding data
Failure to account for alteration of binding equilibria during separation of free and bound testosterone
Variations in the estimates of binding affinity because of differences in the temperature at which binding isotherms and dialysis experiments were performed
Variations in the estimates of binding affinity due to differences in dialysis conditions, including differences in the assay buffer composition and relative volumes of serum and assay buffers
Limited ability to detect additional binding sites on SHBG and HSA because of the narrow range of testosterone concentrations used in the binding experiments