DPV measures the current response to a series of voltage pulses, while CV measures the current response to a linearly increasing or decreasing voltage sweep. The differences in the experimental conditions can cause variations in the observed peak potentials, as the behaviour of the electrode surface may differ between the two techniques . For a reversible and fast, one-electron transfer, the expected peak-to-peak separation (ΔEp) is known to be 57 mV at room temperature for CV measurements. Still, this value is rarely discussed in relation to DPV due to the single potential sweep that is used in DPV unlike the cyclic potential of CV's . In the case of Cyt c, the ΔEp values for the Ox and Red forms were calculated from Figure to be 19 and 27 mV, respectively, suggesting surface chemistry is confined in CV but that same understanding cannot be applied to DPV measurements . These small ΔEp values suggest that a portion of the response is from surface confined Cyt c. In DPV Bard & Faulkner suggest that the surface concentration of analyte is regarded as the apparent bulk concentration of the pulse, suggesting that surface confined electrochemistry is not as important to identify in DPV as in CV to be 19 and 27 mV, respectively, suggesting surface chemistry is confined in CV but that same understanding cannot be applied to DPV measurements . These small ΔEp values suggest that a portion of the response is from surface-confined Cyt c.