Ian, Dave Smith, or anyone else--

Some questions re: widefield deconvolution systems:

1)  How thick a section can you image in cleared tissue?  Does the type
of labeling make a difference (e.g., small discrete objects like nerve
fibers or microtubules vs widely and diffusely distributed antigens like
cellular markers or receptors).

2)  How thick a section can you image in uncleared tissue--e.g.,
vertebrate brain slices or whole-mounts of worms or of insect nervous
systems?  And again, to what extent does the nature of the labeling make
a difference?

3)  How effective is nearest-neighbor deconvolution in either
application?

Thanks!

Martin Wessendorf

Ian Gibbins wrote:

> We have found that deconvolved images of dye-filled
> and immunolabelled neurons in moderately thick preparations really are
> comparable to confocal images of the same preps. We've also used
> deconvolution a bit for images of live tissues and it really does do a
> good job.


--
Martin Wessendorf, Ph.D.                       office:  (612) 626 0145
Assoc Prof, Dept Neuroscience                     lab:  (612) 624 2991
University of Minnesota                 Preferred FAX:  (612) 624 8118
6-145 Jackson Hall, 321 Church St. SE        Dept FAX:  (612) 626 5009
Minneapolis, MN  55455               e-mail:  [log in to unmask]