Hi Mark, To compare FSCs you should know both configurations: 1. Is neutral density (ND) filter present in front of FSC detector on both machines or not? 2. Size of FSC obscuration bar and it's position (probably not very reproducible, but crucial) 3. Lets assume type of photodiode detector and its voltage is same on both. > well I've worked with both and didn't see any difference: both had the same > optical components. Maybe he was using different laser power or something. > However, there appears to be a difference in FSC resolution between the BD > sorters and the FACSCAN. The Scan being better. > > Ann 4. I agree with Ann about the laser power (more power, more intense scattered light and worse CVs giving bigger populations). Difference with Scan comes from light refraction in the jet cylinder in sorters. What else? Probably few more things makes it not so comparable and not so easy to judge which one is better. Just to add some noise, Sasha. ************ Dr Sasha Sreckovic Dept Path & Micro University of Bristol University Walk Bristol, BS8 1TD, UK Sasa.Sreckovic@bristol.ac.uk +44-(0)117-928-8606 ************ ---------- >From: Mark Shlomchik <mark.shlomchik@yale.edu> >To: Cytometry Mailing List <cytometry@flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu> >Subject: Vantage vs. STAR on size discrimination >Date: Fri, Mar 24, 2000, 20:53 > > > To all: > > I have a user who claims that the FACSVantage is inferior to the > FACSTAR in discriminating size of cells by FSC. I would a priori see > no reason why this should be true. Am I missing something? Have > others seen this? > > > Mark Shlomchik, MD, PhD > Associate Professor of Laboratory Medicine > and Immunobiology > Yale University School of Medicine > > 203-688-2089 > 203-688-2748 (fax) > mark.shlomchik@yale.edu >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 10 2001 - 19:31:13 EST