Storm vs Molecular Imager

[mullenlynne at .jsei.ucla.edu]

In article <Peter.Willemsen.1.329454E5 at FYS.rulimburg.nl>, <Peter.Willemsen at FYS.rulimburg.nl> writes:
> Path: nnrp.info.ucla.edu!csulb.edu!news.sgi.com!howland.erols.net!surfnet.nl!rl0001.rulimburg.nl!fys0001.unimaas.nl!Peter.Willemsen
> From: Peter.Willemsen at FYS.rulimburg.nl (P. Willemsen)
> Newsgroups: bionet.molbio.methds-reagnts
> Subject: Storm vs Molecular Imager
> Date: Thu, 21 Nov 1996 13:11:01 GMT
> Organization: Rijksuniversiteit Limburg
> Lines: 13
> Message-ID: <Peter.Willemsen.1.329454E5 at FYS.rulimburg.nl>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: fys0001.unimaas.nl
> Summary: Opinions on Storm  or Molecular Imager
> X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev A]
> 
> 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.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Peter Willemsen
> University Maastricht
> Physiology
> The Netherlands
> peter.willemsen at fys.unimaas.nl
> 
Our group had the STORM after being told that it could do genotyping with SYBR 
green as well as ABI dyes. Unfortunately, it only worked well with 
fluorescence of agarose gels with SYBRgreen, and with the phosphorscreens...we 
were mislead on the genotyping. And film always works better than 
phosphorscreens. PLUS, the STORM sounds like a washing machine; rather scary 
to contemplate what would happen if the parts broke. Also, the Macintosh 
version crashed and burned numerous times.
	After much disappointment, we switched to the Molecular Dynamics 
FluorImager, which only does fluorescence. I can read agarose and 
polyacrylamide gels using ABI dyes and SYBRgreen now without the washing 
machine sound and without my Macintosh crashing. Plus, it scans the image 
faster than the STORM.
	They are apparently working on a version that will be sensitive enough 
for sequencing gels.
	From what I've heard from BioRad, they are trying to get into the 
chemifluorescent market as well, so it would be interesting to see what 
products arrive in the upcoming year.

	Of course, these are my own opinions and observations.
	Hope this can help,

	Lynne Mullen
	UCLA Macular Center