Concealed (Genequant II)

[L. Bastian]

Steve Stelman (steves at burn.ucsd.edu) wrote:
: John Hachey wrote:
: > 
: > Subject:  Genequant II-comments?
: > We are thinking of purchasing a GeneQuant II unit primarily for
: > DNA and RNA quantitation.
: > Can some owners of this machine share their reviews of this
: > instrument?
: >  Thanks, John.

: In short, here are a few of the pro's and con's

: Pros:
: -more accurate quantitation than using a spec

I believe it is, in fact, a limited wavelength spec.

: -easier than our fluorometer, which is difficult to zero
: -light source does not need to warm-up before use

Both true.

: -calculates concentrations based on A260 and A280 in single read

But does not give a curve to distinguish other possible contaminants in 
the solution as a spec wavelength scan can. Furthermore, a Genequant will 
not distinguish RNA from DNA if RNA might contaminate your preps.  A 
fluorometer will.  Unfortunately, a Fluorometer can't be used for RNA, 
oligos, or DNA samples that have been exposed to ethidium. The 
single greatest advantage of a fluorometer is that it is 100-1000 times 
more sensitive than a spec.  Useful for conserving precious sample. 

: -has many calculation functions built in

: Cons:
: -cuvette not included (expensive to purchase from them)

I don't know.  Probably true.

: -cuvette must be inserted and removed on cue from machine
:    within a few seconds, or reading is aborted. This
:    gets to be REALLY annoying, as you have to hover
:    over the machine with the cuvette waiting for the
:    beep.

Yeah.  That is irritating.

: Nevertheless, I use this machine regularly as opposed to
: the alternatives.
: 	
: -- 
: Steve Stelman
: steves at burn.ucsd.edu

I use both, as the occasion warrants.
Good luck,
--
L. Scot Bastian Ph.D.			206-762-1010 ext. 1918 (voice)
University of Washington at the         206-764-2689 (FAX)
  Veterans' Affairs Medical Center      yacman at u.washington.edu (Email)
M/S 151 
1660 S Columbian Way South 
Seattle WA 98108