[Histonet] Re: Histonet Digest, Vol 19, Issue 43

Amos Brooks amosbrooks <@t> earthlink.net
Sat Jul 2 15:19:45 CDT 2005


	We use both depending on the antibody. Mostly we use Envision, but we tried the Impress on some of the antibodies that don't label very intensely and did see improvement. If you compare the results of a CD2, CD4, CD7 or CD8 odds are you'll see some improvement. Not all the antibodies showed marked improvement and in some cases envision was better so we use Envision on most but the success we've had with Impress made it worth switching some of the procedures. Vector might give you a sample if you ask nicely. Give it a whirl and see if you like it.

Best of luck,

Message: 17
Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 07:34:30 -0700
From: Carla M Conway <cmconway <@t> usgs.gov>
Subject: [Histonet] Dako EnVision G2 or Vector ImmPRESS comments
To: Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
	<OFF6D9EC48.FF33E03E-ON88257030.004D25F6-88257030.00501497 <@t> usgs.gov>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII

Hello all,

I would like any comments (pro and con) regarding Dako's EnVision G2/AP
system or Vector's ImmPRESS kit. We are currently using EnVision + , but
are wondering if these new systems could be even better (more sensitive).

Thanks for your help,

Carla Conway

Western Fisheries Research Center
6505 NE 65th St
Seattle, WA 98115
ph: 206-526-6282 ext. 242
fax: 206-526-6654
cmconway <@t> usgs.gov

More information about the Histonet mailing list