At 04:51 26/05/2000, Robert Adair McGilp wrote: >Hello all, >I would like some input regarding an issue I should probably be able to >answer, but ... >I have an investigator who has been using a FACSort to analyse his FITC/ >PE/Cychrome labelled samples and gets good resolution of the populations >of interest (dual positives). He feels that we have been unable to >reproduce the results on our Vantage SE. I expect (and experience) higher sensitivity on the FACScan than on the FACStar Plus, the same comparison should apply to the FACSort vs the Vantage. The optically coupled "stream-in-quartz" detection setup is inherently more sensitive &/or more efficient than the stream-in-air system. By fine-tuning the alignment I have been able to improve the sorter sensitivity, but the FACScan is still better. >We have moved the z axis so that >the nozzle is a good inch above the laser intercept and this gives a good >approximation of the results he has seen on the analyser. I don't know what's going on with a 1" nozzle-intercept gap; I'm quite surprised you can get any usable results like that! Can you still sort with the nozzle up there? I would expect the stream vibration from drop drive to make it unusable. I can't test that on my machine, can't physically move the nozzle up that far.... >I have no >problems with other samples and the sorter is performing very well. Is >there something I can do to increase the sensitivity without rearanging >the entire laser set up? The laser involved is an Enterprise II, with the >primary power (UV) set to 25mW. This gives approx 300mW of 488 line. >Thanks in advance, >Rob McGilp
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Mar 10 2001 - 19:31:22 EST