CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

April 2001

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:
Tom Phillips <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 20 Apr 2001 11:59:56 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (39 lines)
I think some of the problem is your choice of tissue rather than
plastic.  Plants have tough walls, and open spaces mixed together.
this causes a lot of different plasticities (?) within a section
because some areas will infiltrate to a better or worse degree than
neighboring area.  you would have much better luck using a
homogeneous mammalian tissue like liver.


>I teach an undergraduate-level course in electron microscopy, and
>every year I find that the biggest hurdle for my students, not
>surprisingly, is the cutting of thin sections with glass knives.
>This is of course the point at which the students begin to get very
>discouraged with their research projects.   I have tried various
>embedding media based on viscosity/penetration demands (Spurr's or
>ultra-low viscosity for plant tissue, for example), but I have been
>unable to come up with a medium that gives students a greater chance
>at success in cutting sections with glass knives.   Does anyone have
>a favorite embedding medium that would allow fairly routine
>sectioning of diverse biological samples with glass knives.  We are
>using primarily MT-2 microtomes.
>
>I thank you in advance.
>
>Dick Briggs
>Biology Department
>Smith College

--
Thomas E. Phillips, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of Biological Sciences
Director, Molecular Cytology Core Facility

3 Tucker Hall
Division of Biological Sciences
University of Missouri
Columbia, MO 65211-7400
(573)-882-4712 (voice)
(573)-882-0123 (fax)

ATOM RSS1 RSS2