To emphasise the usefulness of the replies copied to the list: Hi Kerstin, There was quite a lot of discussion on the list in April 1998 on the appropriate use of isotype controls, Mario Roederer and Dave Coder discussed a range of issues to consider when designing a controlled experiment. You should be able to find the discussion in the archive, although the new search feature at Purdue doesn't seem to extend back that far - you can view the thread(s) at: http://www.cyto.purdue.edu/hmarchiv/98/index.html either scroll through the messages or use your browser to search for the text "isotyp". Ray > From: Kerstin <beckk@sun11.ukl.uni-freiburg.de> > Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 08:41:14 +0100 > To: Cytometry Mailing List <cytometry@flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu> > Subject: Isotype <-> unstained cells > > > hello everybody, > what do you use as a negative controll (cells not expressing the marker) in > FACS-analyses? Cells stained with the isotype or unstained cells? > I started stainig cells for FACS-analyses for about 2 years and I always > used isotypstained cells as a negetive controll (=marker for unspecific > binding and for correcting the compensation). Someone told me, that > Isotypestaining is not a good negative controll because the Isotype is from > a different host, and can`t representate the unspecific binding. So it > would be better to use unstained cells. > What does you use/Think about this ? > > Thanks > Kerstin > > ***************************************** > Kerstin Beck > Institut für Medizinische Mikrobiologie und Hygiene > Abteilung Virologie > Hermann-Herder-Strasse 11 > D-79104 Freiburg > Telefon : +49-(0)761-203-6646 > Fax : +49-(0)761-203-6603 > beckk@ukl.uni-freiburg.de > ***************************************** > > >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 03 2002 - 11:57:30 EST