Beckmann CEQ 2000 sequencer
Wolfgang.Schechinger at med.uni-tuebingen.de
Fri Jul 7 04:17:56 EST 2000
if you do not have exorbitant sample numbers to cope with, I would
suggest you keep the 310 and eventually buy another one.
I had the opportunity to test both the CEQ2000 an the ABI310.
Finally, we bought the 310. The ABI now is running for 8 month
without any major problems (the computer sometimes hangs when one
starts printing while the sequencer is running, but one easily may
copy the data on a zip disk and print it from somewhere else using
the chromas software package). Although the capillaries are
warrantied for 100 runs only, they withstand more than 250 runs and
the technician changes them because of the run number and not
because of failure (we normally run the short capillary and the pop6
protocol for enabling > 30 samples a day and are processing approx
150 to 200 per week).
Handling and maintenance of the 310 is *much* more easy, there is
much less (=no) hassle with the gel cartriges. With the Beckman, I
had many failing sequencing reactions, clogged capillaries,
arrays going dead after some runs. There were problems we
could not track down, but disappeared by time.
Beckamn's staff which showed up time and again to help us
solving the machine problems seemed to be not very competent; they
almost everytime made suggestions that were written in the manual and
that we had checked before and told them that we did.
Furthermore, to my knowledge, the operating costs of the CEQ2000 are
higher than for the ABI310.
That should be plenty of arguments pro the 310.
If someone has made a better experience with the CEQ2000, I'd be
happy to hear about it.
> From: zoltan at pbrc.hawaii.edu (zoltan szabo)
> Subject: Beckmann CEQ 2000 sequencer
> Date: 7 Jul 2000 00:40:33 +0100
> Organization: BIOSCI/MRC Human Genome Mapping Project Resource Centre
> X-To: methods at net.bio.net
> To: methods at hgmp.mrc.ac.uk
> Has anybody used the CEQ 2000 8-capillary sequencer from Beckmann?
> We currently using ABI 310 and big dye chemistry, but cannot afford
> the 16 capillary upgrade from PE. Is CEQ 2000 good or bad?1
> zoltan szabo
> Univ.of Hawaii
This message is encrypted. Use your brain to decode it.
Dr. Wolfgang Schechinger, Dept. of Pathobiochemistry
University of Tuebingen, Germany
email: wolfgang.schechinger at med.uni-tuebingen.de
usual disclaimers apply
More information about the Methods