Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal

Hi Y'all,

Thanks to everyone for sending me refs both on-line and
off-line.  I will compile a bibliography of those, along with
the other references I am putting in the review, the focus of
which is how deep different imaging modalities can image
(which is of course sample dependent; I will discuss limits
and trade offs).

I will provide back the bibliography as soon as it is done
and I will also provide a preprint after the manuscript has
been reviewed.

One bit of information that I have not come across is how
deep DIC can image.  With a turbid sample, not very deep
of course.  But with more transparent specimens, I presume
one could go pretty deep, but I have not run across
references discussing the issue.  Alternatively any examples
of where DIC has been used to look in depth into tissues or
animals would be equally useful.

A second bit of information concerns "DIC Confocal".  I am not
sure if this actually exists or if it has been used to any substantive
effect.  Because the crossed polarizers cut down a lot of the
light in regular DIC, I would think that by combining it with confocal,
one would be hurting for photons and have difficulty creating
contrast (assuming this makes any sense at all--I am but a simple
caveman neurobiologist!).

Thanks again for all the help!
Don
617-373-2284

p.s. I did not ask for confocal reviews cause I have lots of those,
but do feel free to send me favorites in this genre as well.

Donald M. O'Malley
Associate Professor
Dept. Biology
Northeastern University