Re: high speed sorter: sorting and analysis

From: Chris Worth (caw@bcc.louisville.edu)
Date: Fri Mar 10 2000 - 10:53:08 EST


How fast do your Elite ESP's Sort?

10x faster than not very fast isn't very fast.  So I'm curious.

thanks, chris



On Fri, 25 Feb 2000 08:49:36 -0500, Mark A. KuKuruga wrote:

>
>Andreas,
>Our BD FACS Vantage SE has been in operation for several months.  I ve
>heard from others that initial startup following installation has been a
>problem, but that s not been the case here . . . we were fully
>operational in about a month.  BD, as usual, has been very responsive to
>questions and concerns, and this has helped considerably.
>At this point, I find the Vantage to be very stable, with sensitivity
>comparable to other flow cytometers I ve worked with.  Purity and
>recovery is always very good.  Considering sort rate and recovery, our
>Vantage sorts about 10x faster than our Elite ESPs.  Sort setup
>typically takes about 15 minutes (I can do it in 5, when I m
>desperate).  So far, I have very little to complain about.
>BD s OmniComp (inter-beam compensation) works well, but I think it s
>fair to say that this component is still being developed.  It does
>compensate 633 excitation of the CY part of PE-CY tandems very
>effectively, but not all compensation combinations are possible.  You
>sometimes have to be creative with detector configurations.  BD s
>expanded Detector Options allow this, and I would recommend including
>these options to anyone considering a Vantage.
>I use BD s CloneCyt   their plate sorting system -- frequently (almost
>daily) for sort setup and actual plate sorting.  Since a recent software
>upgrade, it has performed flawlessly.
>The CellQuest software works well and pretty much does everything we
>need it to do.  Again, BD has responded well to the minimal concerns
>I ve had.  I m still contemplating data archival.  I don t trust Zips,
>so eventually I ll install a CD-Recorder.  BD is supposed to be working
>on a recommendation . . .
>I would say that generally, the Vantage has performed well, and
>certainly does all that BD claims.  I would recommend it as a definite
>advantage to any flow sorting operation.
>Have fun.
>MAK.
>--
>Mark A. KuKuruga, Managing Director
>University of Michigan Core Flow Cytometry
><http://www.cancer.med.umich.edu/flow_cytometry>
>phone: 734-647-3216  fax: 734-936-7376
>kukuru@umich.edu
>
>Andreas Simm wrote:
>
>> Hello everybody,
>> I know that this question appears nearly all three month, but I now
>> have to decide which high speed sorter we
>> should buy. As we will have only one apparatus for both, analysis and
>> sorting, the decision (may be) will not be the
>> same as if one consider to buy a flow cytometer for sorting purposes
>> only.
>>
>> And as far as I know, almost only MoFlo user answered to the last
>> queries.
>> So my questions:
>> What is the experience with the Altra (Coulter)? I did not hear from
>> any experience in this list.
>> What is the experience with the FACS-Vantage?
>> From the last queries, the MoFlo tends to be the best sorter (but only
>> users of the MoFlo answered!). What's the
>> experience with it for analysis purposes only. Is it easy to handle?
>> Is anybody in the flow community, who can really compare these
>> sorters?
>>
>> Thanks for every statement in advance!
>>
>> Andreas
>>
>> My address:
>>
>> PD Dr. Andreas Simm
>> Institut fuer Klinische Biochemie und Pathobiochemie
>> Versbacher Str. 5
>> D-97078 Wuerzburg
>> Germany
>>
>> Tel.:   +49 931-201-3144
>> FAX.: +49 931-201-3153
>> E-mail: simm@klin-biochem.uni-wuerzburg.de
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 10 2001 - 19:31:11 EST