Storm vs Molecular Imager
aiyar at ebv.oncology.wisc.edu
Thu Nov 21 10:18:21 EST 1996
In article <Peter.Willemsen.1.329454E5 at FYS.rulimburg.nl>, P. Willemsen wrote:
>We are considering purchasing an Imaging system to detect and quantify signals
>from 32P; 33P; 14C and ECL (chemiluminescence). At the moment we are
>compairing the Storm from Molecular Dynamics and the Molecular Imager (G525)
>from Bio-Rad. We would appreciate any opinions, positive or negative, from
>anyone familiar with these instruments.
I have used an older Molecular Dynamics instrument, as well as the
Storm. There are two things that I do not like about the Storm
a) The phosphorimage screens are placed directly on the "glass" plate
above the scanning head. Since these screens are heavy and awkward
to set down in a gentle manner, I am concerned that it is just a
matter of time before I crack/break the glass plate .....
b) When the Storm scans, it makes a frightful racket, and the
instrument vibrates. I wish that Molecular Dynamics had found a
method to dampen the noise and the vibration.
The old MD instrument we had did neither of these. As a phosphorimage
scanner the Storm works quite well.
Ashok Aiyar, Ph.D.
Department of Oncology email: aiyar at ebv.oncology.wisc.edu
University of Wisconsin-Madison tel: (608) 262-6697
More information about the Methods