I'd be interested!! And not just in articles using my type of confocal - but all the vendors. I don't have Current Contents at the moment but I might be able to be of some help in the compilation if I can get access. I happen to be a BioRad user from way back! Sue DeMaggio UC Irvine ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Vendor-specific publications Author: Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]> at biosmtp Date: 1/31/95 2:31 PM I wanted to summarize the responses to my ill-fated suggestion about tracking specific equipment usage via having authors index vendor names in articles. First of all, I thank Mol. Probes and Zeiss for replies: I appreciate contributions (and corrections) from the vendors themselves. Since Mol. Probes is spending manhours to search the literature, it seems clear that this is not an "effortless" task if it is to be successful. Zeiss's request for authors to send reprints is fair, but frankly we will forget and be grossly incomplete. I agree with the comment that placing the vendor name in keywords or somewhere else in the database is the beginning of a potentially endless clutter: suggestion withdrawn. Why track users at all? The benefit is for both vendors (who need to show the utility of their wares) and users (i.e. this creates the resource of an extended base of users and their applied methodology). We all know how helpful the excellent Mol.Probes reference lists can be when trying to figure out how to answer a new question. Who should do it? I would like to suggest a solution for everyone to edit (and/or destroy). I suggest a collaboration between the vendors and one of their (interested) users who has access to Current Contents on computer. Once every six months, the user can run a standard computer search based on CONFOCAL and <INSTITUTIONS WHICH HAVE YOUR INSTRUMENT>. The latter list would be supplied by the vendor. Then a second tier of search can identify (and print out) which of these references contain one or more folks from the <LIST OF KNOWN USERS>. The remaining references can be read individually by the vendor to find if they apply to their instrument. The final list can be circulated (free by e-mail) to the known users. I think this is realistic. Over the last 6 months, there have been a total of about 600 confocal references: which includes all vendors. I predict the library run will only have to find 10-20 references every 6 months. I would love getting this list on a regular basis, to keep up with the current applications of the instrument and those folk who have successfully done the work (plus I just love reading about new confocal stuff). Am I barking up the wrong tree, fellow confocalists? Any vendors interested? Any volunteers on either side of the street? Chip Montrose, troublemaker Johns Hopkins u.