I posted it there mainly out of principle (openness is good), but it's already attracting some critical commentary. This reminded me that one of the main purposes of the arXiv is to encourage pre-publication discussion of research. This is open peer review!
So please post your comments on our manuscript here. To get things started, here are the comments already made:
As I understand it, Figure S1 has error bars which represent the standard deviation of ion counts for independent purifications of the same DNA sample, characterizing the variance across purifications.Later:
Why use the standard deviation in this case where your sample size=2? Using the two actual values would make more sense to me (estimating the distribution in this case obfuscates the underlying data, as you've irreversibly "reduced" two observed values to two statistical estimates). I think it makes more sense to show the actual observations, or do (at least) three experiments...
FWIW to make sure I wasn't making it up (I've seen error bars on small n estimates before), note the line:
"However, if n is very small (for example n = 3), rather than showing error bars and statistics, it is better to simply plot the individual data points."
Error bars in experimental biology
Or have the error bars indicate the range rather than standard deviation?