Re: New Sorter and things

From: Howard Shapiro (hms@shapirolab.com)
Date: Fri Dec 17 1999 - 16:15:45 EST


Jim-


>I feel that i must take issue with two parts of your email about the new
>CalTech sorter.
>
>First,  this is a late example, by no means the first example, of extending
>"practical cytometry" in the direction of the analysis of smaller stuff.
>Our first publication was in 1982 and we have been improving, evolving our
>technology since that time.  While you and I may argue over ther word
>practical, our philosophy has been first do it and then make it parctical.

No question you did it first (although I seem to remember that Tomas 
Hirschfeld's single molecule analysis in the mid-1970's and the slow-flow 
analyzer with which the Block group and I did virus analysis then provided 
some inspiration), and I am aware from Rob Habbersett's presentations at 
the Asilomar workshops that your systems get progressively more 
practical.   But I think Steve Quake's instrument is more practical, and it 
does sort.  And there's no question that it was easier for them to develop 
what they did after what had gone before.


>The second item refers to your comment about our need to use an expensive
>detector.  While it is true that we use quenched APDs to do our photon
>counting, PMT-based photon counting is more complex.  The APD is a self
>contained unit that you supply 5 volts and it cools itself and sends out a
>pulse for each photon detected that is directly recorded in a multi channel
>scaler, or equivalent.  No preamps, amps, ADCs, etc.  In the long run,
>which appraoch is less expensive is not a simple answer.  I believe that we
>will be very competitive with the CalTech approach when the while system is
>taken into account.

While, as third parties (Bart De Grooth's group) seem to have shown, photon 
counting will give you the most sensitivity; the Caltech people do pretty 
well with linear fluorescence analysis.  And their electronics are 
relatively simple.  Where all this goes with the continuing miniaturization 
and larger scale integration of optoelectronics, I don't know.  I guess the 
marketplace will tell us.

>Have a good holiday

You too - this year, I'm wishing everybody a bug-free Y2K instead of the 
standard Happy New Year...

-Howard



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 03 2002 - 11:54:21 EST