CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

December 2007

CONFOCALMICROSCOPY@LISTS.UMN.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"S. Pagakis (IIBEAA)" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 10 Dec 2007 15:52:57 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (83 lines)
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal

>
> From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
> On Behalf Of George McNamara
> Sent: Sunday, 9 December 2007 6:08 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Coverslip thickness and correction collar ... option Ib
>
> Search the CONFOCAL archive at 
> http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
>
> option Ib. Measure of the glass thickness before you culture your 
> cells. Then, for this lens, use dishes whose coverglasses are 170 um 
> (or whatever thickness works best for the lens at its current 
> "optimal" setting).
>
> If one in five are the right thickness, than the cost of that dish, 
> for this experiment, has gone from about $2 to $10. Should take less 
> than a minute to measure a dish using a 20x, decent NA, dry lens.


Dear George

On a recent test I did, I discovered something that I had not expected. 
A dry objective would significantly underestimate the thickness of a 
glass coverslip.

For a #1 coverslip, a 20x dry objective would measure it as 98microns 
thick, where as a 63oil objective as 138microns thick.
For a #1.5 coverslip the values were 113microns and 160microns 
respectively.

As I said, I wasn't expecting it because the 20 lens was coverslip 
corrected.

So you have to be very careful when using dry objectives to measure 
anything in Z.

regards

*********************************
Stamatis Pagakis Ph.D.
Biological Imaging Unit
Biomedical Research Foundation, Academy of Athens
[log in to unmask]




> Compared to the cost of the confocal time (or of an LSM510), or of 
> your time to do manual image analysis, or cost of the analysis 
> computer and image analysis software, the extra cost is trivial. Plus, 
> you can sort the "rejects" and use them with lenses each thickness is 
> optimized for.

> George McNamara, Ph.D.
> University of Miami, Miller School of Medicine
> Image Core
> Miami, FL 33010
> [log in to unmask]
> [log in to unmask]
> 305-243-8436 office
> http://home.earthlink.net/~pubspectra/
> http://home.earthlink.net/~geomcnamara/
> http://www.sylvester.org/health_pro/shared_resources/index.asp (see 
> Analytical Imaging Core Facility)
>
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.17/1177 - Release Date: 
> 7/12/2007 1:11 PM
>
>
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
>  Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>  Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.17/1178 - Release Date: 
> 8/12/2007 11:59 AM

ATOM RSS1 RSS2