advice on phosphorimager purchase
aquilla at salus.med.uvm.edu
Mon Nov 7 17:11:51 EST 1994
In Article <1994Nov7.124724.1 at science.adelaide.edu.au>,
rdkortschak at science.adelaide.edu.au wrote:
> I remember a few threads sometime ago on the relative merits and
>disadvantages of various phosphorimagers. Our department is currently
>looking into purchasing a phosphorimager and we would like some opinions
>on which machines are worth buying. We have heared that the BioRad machine is
>not the best (but only from competing companies).
>Please e-mail responses to:
>rdkortschak at gina.science.adelaide.edu.au
>Department of Genetics
>University of Adelaide
I have only used the Bio-Rad machine, and I really like it. It is easy to
use, it's fast, and it's accurate. The chemistry of Bio-Rad's phosphor
screens is unique. Bio-Rad's chemistry is Strontium Sulfide and MD's
chemistry is Barium Fluoro Bromide. The advantages of Bio-Rad's screens are:
ability to detect chemiluminescense with screens optimized for
radioactivity, and a low rate of spontaneous "de-charging", allowing longer
exposures with high signal retention.
Thus Bio-Rad's screens are more sensitive in the sense that they can detect
low-level signals after very long exposure times. Good luck with it.
More information about the Methods