[Histonet] mouse on mouse kit

[Laura Harris]

I used Vector's mouse-on-mouse kit on several antibodies on frozen 
tissue, with no appreciable reduction of the background at all! I found 
it to be a complete waste of time.

Laura Harris
University of Cambridge, UK

Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 08:39:16 -0600
From: Gayle Callis <gcallis <@t> montana.edu>
Subject: Recommendation for Re: [Histonet] mouse on mouse kit
To: Helen E Johnson <hej01 <@t> health.state.ny.us>,
	Histonet <@t> lists.utsouthwestern.edu
Message-ID:
	<6.0.0.22.1.20070313083135.01b77c18 <@t> gemini.msu.montana.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

Helen,

A wonderful poster at the NSH symposium/convention in Ft Lauderdale (by
Mary Payette, et al) showed a comparison of 8 kits.  The top two giving no
background were DAKO's ARK kit and Biocares MM kit, both based on
biotinylation of the primary antibody.

One had minimal background, two gave moderate background, and three had
marked background.  This was a very well designed test of kits.  In our
experience, kits containing secondary antibodies always gave more
background, even with all the tidy little special blocks companies put in
the kits.  We would be using the top two above in the future.

   07:08 AM 3/13/2007, you wrote:
 > >Hi Histonetters,
 > >      I need a recommendation on a IHC mouse on mouse detection kit.
 > >                                                     Helen Johnson

Gayle Callis
MT,HT,HTL(ASCP)
Research Histopathology Supervisor
Veterinary Molecular Biology
Montana State University - Bozeman
PO Box 173610
Bozeman MT 59717-3610
406 994-6367
406 994-4303 (FAX)