RE: anti-CD64

From: Calman Prussin (CPRUSSIN@niaid.nih.gov)
Date: Wed Dec 08 1999 - 11:16:15 EST


Is it made up against a peptide or the whole CD64 molecule? The latter has a
better chance of cross reacting.

Is it affinity purified? That makes a big difference. 

I have had excellent experience with polyclonal secondary antibodies. My
experience with primary ones is more limited, but many work well are at
least have low noise. I do not have much experience with goat primary
polyclonals. you may wish to check with Barb and see what anti-goat Ig
conjugates we have. You are welcome to try one, if we have it.

I would not label it directly until you know if it works in indirect
staining.

Have you looked through Linscott's directory? They have a list of all
commercially available Abs. There is one in the NIH library and I would
guess someone at Twinbrook has it as well. 

After you check Linscott's, I would ask these email discussion groups if
anyone knows:

NIH immunology interest group: Immuni-L@list.nih.gov
Perdue university flow cytometry list: cytometry@flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu

> ----------
> From: 	Michael Woolhiser
> Sent: 	Wednesday, December 8, 1999 11:03 AM
> To: 	Calman Prussin
> Subject: 	anti-CD64
> 
> Hi. Thanks again for your time yesterday. The goat polyclonal I found on
> the Internet site is indeed directed against human CD64 but the tech.
> people suspect it is cross reactive with murine. As far as I can tell this
> is based solely on sequence homology since they have not conducted flow or
> blot analyses. It is also unlabeled. So...what is your experience with
> polyclonal antibodies in FACS analyses? Also, would it be better to order
> a secondary antibody or label the polyclonal ourselves?
> 
> Mike Woolhiser
> 



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 03 2002 - 11:54:20 EST