You might also consider the Milteny system. It performed better in our hands than the Dynospheres. See also: Porter, J., Pickup, R., and Edwards, C. Evaluation of flow cytometric methods for the detection and viability assessment of bacteria from soil. Soil Biology & Biochemistry 29(1):91-100, 1997. They used lectin based IMS Regards Gerhard -----Original Message----- From: Dr. Andrew S. Thompson [SMTP:A.S.Thompson@queens-belfast.ac.uk] Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 1999 8:50 AM To: Cytometry Mailing List Subject: Immunomagnetic separation I'm considering IMS as a way of seperating filamentous bacteria (Microthrix parvicella) from activated sludge samples. Has anyone recently done anything similar, and also any comments on the various brands available. I'm considering Dynal and Advanced Magnetics antiRabbit IGg products, but have heard Dynal beads give low recovery rates. Thanks, ---------------------- Dr. Andrew S. Thompson Research Fellow (Microbiology) QUESTOR Centre, Queens University Stranmillis Road, Belfast, BT9 5AG Northern Ireland, UK Tel. +44 (0)1232 274218 (direct)/ 335577 (main office) FAX. +44 (0)1232 661462 Email: (main) a.s.thompson@qub.ac.uk, (alternate) trubrit@iname.com Wanna get hold of me in a hurry? Email my mobile phone with a short message. Send mobile email to: lspab@sms.genie.co.uk URL: http://questor.qub.ac.uk/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 03 2002 - 11:54:03 EST