Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Mon, 28 Jan 2013 13:19:53 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
*****
Here is a very nice summary of the ins and outs of aldehyde fixation:
http://publish.uwo.ca/~jkiernan/formglut.htm
Sincerely,
Will
-----Original Message-----
From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Kathryn Spencer
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 1:11 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Glutaraldehyde and sodium borohydride reduction
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy
*****
Hello;
Please indulge a cell biologist trying to understand chemistry...
We are discussing the differences between glutaraldehyde and
formaldehyde fixation for immunofluorescence. When fixing with
glutaraldehyde (0.1% glut with 3% PFA), we follow the fixation with sodium
borohydride reduction. I understand that this converts the unused aldehyde
groups to unreactive hydroxyls. Why is this step not required for
formaldehyde fixation? Merely because PFA has one aldehyde group and Glut
has two on the ends exposed after polymerization?
Thanks.
Kathy
Kathryn R. Spencer, PhD
The Scripps Research Institute
10550 N. Torrey Pines Road, DNC 210
La Jolla, CA 92037
|
|
|