CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

April 2003

CONFOCALMICROSCOPY@LISTS.UMN.EDU

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

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

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Sender:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Matt Conklin <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 23 Apr 2003 11:47:50 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Reply-To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (35 lines)
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal

Dear confocalists,
         We are interested in using the scanhead of a BioRad MRC-600
confocal to direct UV uncaging of calcium (using NP-EGTA and fluo-4).
The idea being that we can uncage smaller areas using the electronic
zoom feature of  the confocal than if we used pinhole apertures along
the vertical illuminator lightpath. Because we are only interested in
getting the UV light to the cell to uncage, we are hoping to avoid
many of the problems/artifacts associated with emitted UV
fluorescence. However we are still concerned about a couple things.
First, we aren't using a UV laser, we are using a mercury arc lamp
(i.e. non-collimated light), is this a problem? Second, do
galvonometer mirrors reflect UV light? Our objective lens does
transmit UV light. The laser light is not fiber optically coupled to
the scanhead, and the UV light is directed into the scanhead through
the same opening the laser uses.
        Some advice as to the feasibility of this experiment would be
greatly appreciated, are we missing something obvious?


Matt



--
Matthew W. Conklin, Ph.D.
University of California-San Diego
Section of  Neurobiology
Rm. 3220 Pacific Hall
La Jolla, CA 92093-0357
(858)534-2456 (lab)
(858)581-6278 (home)

ATOM RSS1 RSS2