Undergrad radioactive use, teaching/research?

dkatz at doane.edu dkatz at doane.edu
Wed Feb 22 12:54:24 EST 1995


Feb. 22, 1995

Once again I turn to my favorite group for advice and comments.
Each time I ask for help, I get so many good responses, that it
is obvious that this is a collection of very good and knowledgeable
scientists.
My question is about teaching - specifically this:
Does anyone who is not involved in a radioisotope technique class
still continue to use radioisotopes with undergraduates in a 
class (lab) or in student research?
We are lucky enough to have a radioactive license, which we are 
maintaining solely because we have a wonderful Beckman LSC and
a gas chromatograph.
License fees are probably going to increase three fold this next
fee cycle.
I really, really need responses as to the current undergrad use
of radionucleotides and this type of activity and whether the
opinion of outsiders is : it is worth the money to keep/it is
not worth the money to keep.

If working with hot stuff is now passe with undergraduates, why
should we keep the license.
I have determined two, perhaps three reasons for us, as biology,
to keep it: 1) sequencing - it is my understanding that using
fluorescence is much more expensive to set up and keep running;
2) southern/northerns from genomic - I have still not had much luck
doing this with biotin or non-rad techniques.
Perhaps 3) would be watching CO2 fixation for botany or using the
hot stuff as a tracer for enzyme reactions.


So: I would welcome a response from anyone involved in teaching
undergraduates, whether large school or small about current/past/future
use of radionucleotides in this endeavor.

If there is any wish, I would be glad to post the responses.  To avoid
cluttering bionet space, unless there needs to be an open discussion, I 
would request responses come to me at Doane.

Thank you.
Sue Katz,   Biology, Doane College,  Crete, NE 68333
DKatz at Doane.edu

tiny, who wishes to respond 




More information about the Methods mailing list