[Histonet] Coverslipping

[John Kiernan]

You're right of course, about the way you are taught being correct!
 
My justification for coverslipping thicker objects by the slide-on-table method is that it's easier to control the amount of mounting medium, so that there's more of it over any holes and between the object and where the edge of the coverslip will be. If a slide with a thick object on it is lowered onto a coverslip with a slug of mountant on it, there will often be bubbles, and even more often bays of air forming as the solvent evaporates. (My thick objects have mostly been whole-mounts of layers dissected from rat or mouse intestine, containing the myenteric plexus sandwiched between the longitudinal and circular smooth muscle layers. These rectangular specimens can be up to 2X3cm, and they sometimes try to curl up into cylinders again, even after staining, dehydration and clearing.)
 
John Kiernan
Anatomy, UWO
London, Canada
= = =
----- Original Message -----
From: "Breeden, Sara" <sbreeden <@t> nmda.nmsu.edu>
Date: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 7:58
Subject: RE: [Histonet] Coverslipping
To: John Kiernan jkiernan <@t> uwo.ca
> It’s just that I was taught the “place the coverslip ON the slide”, not “place the slide ON the coverslip” and as one knows, the way you are taught is the way you think is correct.  I’ve done it this way for so long that it would cause my fingers to have major emotional problems!  It’s like the pronunciation of “tomato” or “potato”…  I would think that the “place the slide ON the coverslip” method would be more acceptable in, say, Australia (because the country is on the “bottom” of the world… J
>  
> What is your justification for the “backward” way of coverslipping for sections less than 50 um?
>  
> Sally Breeden, HT(ASCP)
> NM Dept. of Agriculture
> Veterinary Diagnostic Services
> PO Box 4700
> Albuquerque, NM  87106
> 505-841-2576
>