Dilution range

Tracer Diffusivity Tracer diffusivity, denoted by D g is related to both mutual and self-diffusivity. It is evaluated in the presence of a second component B, again using a tagged isotope of the first component. In the dilute range, tagging A merely provides a convenient method for indirect composition analysis. As concentration varies, tracer diffusivities approach mutual diffusivities at the dilute limit, and they approach selr-diffusivities at the pure component limit. That is, at the limit of dilute A in B, D g D°g and... 

The Stokes-Einstein equation has already been presented. It was noted that its vahdity was restricted to large solutes, such as spherical macromolecules and particles in a continuum solvent. The equation has also been found to predict accurately the diffusion coefficient of spherical latex particles and globular proteins. Corrections to Stokes-Einstein for molecules approximating spheroids is given by Tanford. Since solute-solute interactions are ignored in this theory, it applies in the dilute range only. 

Now interpret phase X as pure solute then Cs and co become the equilibrium solubilities of the solute in solvents S and 0, respectively, and we can apply Eq. (8-58). Again the concentrations should be in the dilute range, but nonideality is not a great problem for nonelectrolytes. For volatile solutes vapor pressure measurements are suitable for this type of determination, and for electrolytes electrode potentials can be used. 

A solution that is so dilute that the difference between the cratic term and the total communal term may be neglected will be said to have a concentration lying in the extremely dilute range. ... 

We shall be interested in the magnitude of d in comparison with kT. We may say that, when — d is less than one quarter of kT, the solution is dilute and, when — dx is less than 0.002fc7, we may say that the concentration lies in the extremely dilute range. For a uni-univalent solute let us define a number /, a function of the concentration, by writing... 

Turning now to the non-ideal solution, we may answer question (1) by saying that the value of (163) will vary with concentration only insofar as the solution differs from an ideal solution and we can proceed to ask a third question how would the value of (163) vary with concentration for an ionic solution in the extremely dilute range We must answer that in a series of extremely dilute solutions the value of (163) would be constant within the experimental error it is, in fact, a unitary quantity, characteristic of the solute dissolving in the given solvent. As in See. 55, this constant value adopted by (163) in extremely dilute solutions may conveniently be written as the limiting value as x tends to zero thus... 

For solutions which do not follow Beer s Law, it is best to prepare a calibration curve using a series of standards of known concentration. Instrumental readings are plotted as ordinates against concentrations in, say, mg per lOOmL or lOOOmL as abscissae. For the most precise work each calibration curve should cover the dilution range likely to be met with in the actual comparison. 

A single extrapolation of the ratio D/s measured at a series of very low concentrations would then suffice. The graphical method advocated above for handling osmotic and turbidity data could be applied here also for the purpose of obtaining (D/s)o = RT/M, Again, if a poor solvent is used, so that T2 is very small, D/s should be nearly independent of c over the dilute range. 

Fig. 111.—Experimental values of the interaction parameter %i plotted against the volume fraction of polymer. Data for polydi-methylsiloxane M =3850) in benzene, A (New-ingi6). polystyrene in methyl ethyl ketone, (Bawn et aV ) and polystyrene in toluene, O (Bawn et alP) are based on vapor pressure measurements. Those for rubber in benzene, T (Gee and Orr ) were obtained using vapor pressure measurements at higher concentrations and isothermal distillation equilibration with solutions of known activities in the dilute range.

These classical molecular theories may be used to illustrate good agreement with the experimental findings when describing the two extremes of concentration ideally dilute and concentrated polymer solutions (or polymer melts). However, when they are used in the semi-dilute range, they lead to unsatisfactory results. 

Although these examples demonstrate the feasibility of using calculated values as estimates, several constraints and assumptions must be kept in mind. First, the diffusant molecules are assumed to be in the dilute range where Henry s law applies. Thus, the diffusant molecules are presumed to be in the unassociated form. Furthermore, it is assumed that other materials, such as surfactants, are not present. Self-association or interaction with other molecules will tend to lower the diffusion coefficient. There may be differences in the diffusion coefficient for molecules in the neutral or charged state, which these equations do not account for. Finally, these equations only relate diffusion to the bulk viscosity. Therefore, they do not apply to polymer solutions where microenvironmental viscosity plays a role in diffusion. 

There are several disadvantages with this method, the prime one being the increasing interval between each successive dilution, which makes the determination of an accurate relationship difficult over the increasing dilution range. Additionally, the units of concentration are less conveniently calculated. If, for instance, the stock solution contained 5.0 mg l1 then the 1 in 16 dilution would contain 5.0/16 = 0.3125 mgl-1. The technique, however, is useful if it is necessary to cover a wide concentration range, possibly as a preliminary to developing a method for routine use. 

Debye-Huckel effects are significant in the dilute range and are not considered, and (2) the usual composition scale for the solute standard state is molality rather than mole fraction. Both of these problems have been overcome, and the more complex relationships are being presented elsewhere (17). However, for most purposes, the virial coefficient equations for electrolytes are more convenient and have been widely used. Hence our primary presentation will be in those terms. 

Antibody concentrations and affinities vary considerably. The optimal dilution for a given primary antibody must be determined empirically (although most companies will give an indicative range of dilutions). In general, early bleed serum or tissue culture supernatant are used at 1 100-1 1,000 dilution, and ascites fluid or serum from hyperimmunized animals at 1 1,000-1 100,000 dilution. Secondary antibodies are used at dilutions ranging from 1 2,000 to 1 10,000... 

Prepare a standard graph by using the standard solution in the dilution range from 0.2 to 2 p,mol. 

The calibration graph should cover the dilution range likely to be used in the determination of the concentration of the unknown solution. If the solution of unknown concentration has an absorbance value outwlth those used in the calibration graph, another calibration graph should be prepared using more appropriate concentrations of the standard solutions. 

Practical Issues for Genotoxicity Profiling Vehicle, Dose, Dilution Range and Impurity... 

Pipet 100 pi of a suitable dilution of a secondary antibody-HRP conjugate into each well (the dilutions range from 1 500 to 1 100 000, dependent on the quality of the conjugate, and the amount of bound primary antibody the dilution has to be checked empirically). Incubate on a shaker at RT for 30 min. Wash with Soln. B at least three times to remove traces of unbound conjugate. 

Absorption isotherms were measured in the dilute range of the a phase from n = 0 to n = 0.012 and from 418° to 586°K. From four isotherms in the range... 

The fluidity of ammonia increases about 1.5% per degree, and in the dilute range the temperature coefficient of metal solutions is of this order of magnitude but from a concentration of approximately 0.9AT onward the temperature coefficient of sodium and potassium begins to increase, reaching a maximum of about 3.6% for sodium and 4.6% for potassium. The conductance increase owing to temperature increase can only be caused by an increased dissociation of sodium spinide. It follows that the conductance increase with increasing concentration of sodium solutions is to be expected and conforms with the assumptions of a micro Wien effect. 

---