Gerhard, I tend to agree with you that PE-Cy7 is more "natural" from the RET standpoint. However, we preferred Cy7PE (and Cy7APC, as well as Cy5.5PE, Cy5.5APC) because we had been habituated to the abbreviation Cy5PE. I suppose everyone knows what you're talking about no matter which you choose, so, I think everyone should use whatever they like! (Besides, given that there are people who object to the term "FACS", I shy from "suggesting" any given abbreviation! Even if those same individuals persist in using "FITC" when they mean fluorescein.) Anyway, the original publication of Cy7PE has it as such. The two original publications for the APC tandem (ours and Beavis') had the abbreviations Cy7APC and Allo-7, respectively. Choose your poison. mr (PS-with regard to background binding of Cy7PE to monocytes--we still do not see the same extent of background binding that Cy5PE has with our own conjugates; in fact, the background binding appears to be relatively minor. This may be something specific to the way our conjugates are made or in the way we stain (we don't do anything unusual except perhaps use biotin-deficient RPMI as our staining medium instead of PBS); but I have never compared our conjugates to commercial conjugates nor studied this extensively, since I rarely look at monocytes). >Hi Mario > >A puristic question: Is it PE-Cy7 or Cy7-PE. I would use the first as the Cy7 >piggybacked on the PE which is also the direction of energy transfer. >Also, would you be in a position to make up a table of names the companies use >for the various base conjugates, their emission / excitation >properties. Or has >howard perhaps already one in preparation similar to the one in his book with >the various dyes and the major lines from the available sources? > >Thanks in advance > >Gerhard
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 03 2002 - 11:54:18 EST