Affinity chtomatography - Sepharose vs Sephacryl?

Dr Engelbert Buxbaum via methods%40net.bio.net (by engelbert_buxbaum from hotmail.com)
Tue Oct 14 14:48:47 EST 2008


Am 04.10.2008, 20:53 Uhr, schrieb DK <dk from no.email.thankstospam.net>:

> In article  
> <4ec714cc-c741-4acb-b354-3260a7c50eed from p59g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>, WS  
> <novalidaddress from nurfuerspam.de> wrote:
>>
>> probably this is because most people (have to/want to) stick to
>> established and traditional methods. Those companies who offer the
>> corresponding kits don't need to change their ingredients as long as
>> the existing ones are selling well.
>
> Well, I asked for a *good* reason :-) That's not quite it. Basically, I  
> am
> trying to understand why Pharmacia itself never sold any form of
> activated or ligand-coupled Sephacryl and is selling a dozen of
> various activated and affinity sorbents based on Sepharose.

Part of the reason may be that the old Pharmacia company no longer exists,  
it was bought first by Amersham and later by GE. It is quite possible that  
the expertise in separation technology once concentrated at Pharmacia has  
dispersed. The fact that the monographs on various separation techniques  
that Pharmacia used to offer for free are no longer maintained or even  
available (and it would be so cheap to put a pdf on their web-site)  
strongly points in that direction, as does the fact that we no longer hear  
about new techniques or matrices developed there. At least the Hoefer  
electrophoresis line is now rescued. Sic transit gloria mundi :-(


More information about the Methods mailing list