CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

July 2008

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:
Michael Weber <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 14 Jul 2008 16:45:19 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines)
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal

Kate,

the objective kills quite some light, its transmission at 800nm is about 
60% according to the Zeiss website. Check the database and your place 
for objectives with better IR transmission, i.e. the Neofluar 40x/1.3 
(80% at 800nm). This might already help to boost the detection a bit.

Michael


Kate Phelps wrote:
> Search the CONFOCAL archive at
> http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
> 
> I neglected to mention that we can take very nice pictures of 
> immunofluorescence labeling with IRDye 800 goat anti-rabbit secondary
> antibody with this set up. So it is a problem of optimizing to detect a very
> weak signal, not whether we can do it at all.
> Thanks for everyone's help. Please keep the suggestions coming!
> 
> Kate

ATOM RSS1 RSS2