deletions | additions       diff --git a/Discussion.tex b/Discussion.tex  index 052ad22..46ce8b1 100644  --- a/Discussion.tex  +++ b/Discussion.tex 
...
Our measured radius of 3.49$\pm$0.03~nm for the well-characterised protein BSA is in excellent agreement with the accepted value of 3.48~nm.\cite{Axelsson1978} The cubic dependence of the radius on the rotational correlation time means that this technique is more sensitive to small changes in radius than methods where the radius depends on the measurement linearly, e.g.\ fluorescence correlation spectroscopy (FCS) and fluorescence recovery after photobleaching (FRAP).  Anisotropy measurements can also give information about the shape of the molecule. The measured anisotropies are clearly double-exponential: besides the component corresponding to the rotation of the drug molecule, there is an additional fast component. This component cannot be attributed to non-spherical shape of the molecule; in case of an ellipsoid, the anisotropy decay is three-exponential, but the three exponentials are linked, and the fast component is too fast to fit this model. While it is too fast to be measured accurately with this method due to the long lifetime of the dye, the results indicate a size comparable to the dye molecule, and this component is most likely caused by the rotation of the dye molecule on its bond. Wilkins \textit{et.\ al.} \textit{et al.}\  report a similar component.\cite{Wilkins1999} Double-exponential fit taking this component into account produces excellent fit results for our experimental data, indicating that the proteins are approximately spherical in shape. DLS, based on the measurement of fluctuating scattered light intensity due to Brownian motion of the particles, is a well established method for determining the size of small particles in solution, including macromolecular drugs. Wen \textit{et al} al.}\  \cite{Wen2013} report hydrodynamic radii of 4.2~nm for ranibizumab and 6.3~nm for bevacizumab using DLS, and 5.4~nm for BSA measured as a control, and Li \textit{et al} al.}\  \cite{Li2011} 4.1~nm, 6.5~nm and 4.8~nm for the same molecules, respectively. These results are slightly higher than estimates based on MW, which they suspect could be due to aggregation. DLS is limited to very low solute concentrations (generally $\lesssim$1~mg/ml). SAXS and SANS are also popular methods for the size measurement of macromolecules. While they can be used with higher particle concentrations than DLS ($\sim$1-100~mg/ml) and are applicable to a large MW range from few kDa to hundreds of MDa, they have low resolution, and structural information can only be obtained through complex model building.\cite{Pecora_1985} Similar to DLS, SAXS and SANS measure scattering from unlabelled molecules which simplifies sample preparation but makes the results susceptible to artefacts arising from dust and other contamination in the sample solution, and makes these techniques impossible to be used with scattering media, such as tissue.