Tween-20 versus Triton-X 100

[Dr Engelbert Buxbaum]

Am 08.06.2007, 15:06 Uhr, schrieb Wendy Grus <wgrus from umich.edu>:

> Hi all-
> I am trying to figure out my protocol for fluorescence in situ based a  
> protocol for not fluorescent in situ.  The former uses Triton-X 100  
> while the latter uses Tween 20.  Is there is big difference between  
> these?

No, both consist of an alkyl-tail, a ring and a {hydrophilic} polyethylene  
glycol head. Triton is tert-C8-Phenyl-E9.6, Tween 20 is C12-sorbitan-E20.  
For fluorescent studies I would probably prefer the Tween, as the aromatic  
ring in Triton absorbs in the UV (alternatively, use hydrogenated Triton  
X-100). Note that both are industrial detergents wich may be contaminated  
with oxidising or fluorescent impurities, get MolBiol grade stuff to avoid  
problems.

For detergent properties see  
http://psyche.uthct.edu/shaun/SBlack/detergnt.html, www.anatrace.com or a  
useful booklet published by Calbiochem.