Hi All, I was quite happy to leave this discussion to the data
experts and learn from them until I read the posting from Deborah Bergland
trashing B.D.'s previous contour plots. I cannot let that go
unanswered. I assume that by "archaic software", she means C30, or C32,
as there is really no difference between Lysis II and CellQuest when it
comes to contour plot option. I could not disagree more, and in fact I
found that most flow users in the institutions I have worked in feel the
same way about the fancy new contouring methods, and have gone over to dot
plots for analysis. For the people who do not remember that far back, in
C30 we could assign our own contours for example have lines that
represented 1, 5, 10, 25 and 100. events. As the contour lines were the
same for each sample it was possible to graphically compare one to another.
As I understand the way the new software formats the contours, each
sample is calculated on data from that sample I assume that this is one
of the objections that the pro dot-plot side of the argument have.
However as a number of people have pointed out the plots are only an
illustration of the data which should be discussed and not left to the
reader to interpret.
Jill Martin, , Manager
Molecular Biology & Flow Cytometry Core
Johnson Research Building
Mayo Clinic Scottsdale
602-301-6071 (Voice)
602 301-7017 (FAX)
email: jmartin@mayo.edu or martin.jill@mayo.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 03 2002 - 11:50:12 EST