= Solution
\b[The major problems are unequal recovered totals, absence of replication/error estimates, and ambiguity about what pellets.] Wild-type <supernatant> plus pellet signal is roughly 860 units without drug and 1,100 with drug; the mutant totals also differ. Equal starting <actin> should give comparable total recovery after correcting for fraction volumes and loading. The graph does not specify such corrections, so comparing raw pellet heights alone is misleading. Fractions $P/(S+P)$ are more informative but still require comparable staining response and unbiased recovery.
The mutant's poor drug-free pelleting is biologically important and should not be hidden by calling it simply resistant. Independent preparations and replicate assays would establish whether that baseline is reproducible. One drug <concentration> and one nominal steady-state time cannot establish potency, <binding affinity>, assembly kinetics or attainment of a true steady state. The gel confirms an actin-sized band but does not preserve <actin filament> structure: denaturation occurs after separation. Short <actin filaments> can remain in the <supernatant>, and aggregates can pellet. Direct imaging, mass-balance controls, a monomer-only control and a linear <densitometry> calibration would make the interpretation substantially stronger.
Back to article page
