Phosphorimagers...opinions on brands?
c557652 at mizzou1.missouri.edu
Tue May 3 22:16:58 EST 1994
In article <Pine.3.89.9405021417.A16917-0100000 at unixg.ubc.ca> brunstei at UNIXG.UBC.CA (John Brunstein) writes:
>From: brunstei at UNIXG.UBC.CA (John Brunstein)
>Subject: Phosphorimagers...opinions on brands?
>Date: 2 May 1994 14:40:43 -0700
> We finally have the money for a phosphorimager in our
>collectively sweaty hands and although we have seen demos of both the
>Molecular Dynamics and Bio-Rad machines we would be interested in hearing
>from satisfied or disatisfied users of these or other makes to help in
>making our final choice.
> Also, what sort of bulk storage media are people using for the
>data files? WORM, Magneto-optical,Colorado drive, Bernouli Boxes/SyQuest
> Any info on these would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! =:^>
One thing to consider is the difference between a machine that reads the
signal directly from the gel (or whatever) and a machine that requires a
screen that is exposed to the gel, then scanned by the machine. A member
of our lab recently did some experiments that ended up with a very weak
signal. Thus they required a fairly long exposure to the screen (it was a
week or two). If this much time was spent IN THE MACHINE, or even a fraction
of this time, it would be unavailable to others. With a screen system,
several experiments can be exposing at a time, then each scanned with only
limited machine time. This can be especially useful if several labs will use
be using it.
> Robert Woodward, c557652 at mizzou1.missouri.edu <
| Department of Physiology, University of Missouri |
> (314) 882-5374, FAX: (314) 884-4276 <
More information about the Methods