> Hi Mike,
>
> Why are you limiting yourself to either an LSR II or a Canto?  You
> should look around as there are other options.  A great deal
> depends on what you need as far as number of colors/parameters,
> physical size limitations to put the instrument in, any knowledge
> of the software running the instrument, etc.    For instance, we have
> both a Canto and a CyAn.  The Canto I we have only does 6 colors,
> the CyAn 9.  The CyAn is about a third the size of the Canto, maybe
> even smaller.  An LSR II outfitted with all the possible PMT's can
> do at least 18 colors, but do you need or anticipate needing this
> capability?  The LSR II is also huge and requires a special bench.
>
> Randy T. Fischer, NIH/NIAMS
> B Cell Biology Group
> 9000 Rockville Pike
> Bldg 10, Room 6D50
> Bethesda, MD 20892
> (301) 594-3537 (voice)
> (301) 402-2209 (fax)
>
> From: Mindy Hankrasky <mhankrasky@hotmail.com>
> Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 13:02:28 -0700
> To: Cytometry Mailing List <cytometry@flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu>
> Subject: LSR II vs. FACScanto
>
> Hi, All,
>
> I am considering to buy a FACS machine. But I have no knowledge
> about the comparison of LSR II and FACScanto. Could someone give me
> suggestion in terms of function and price?
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike
>
> Change is good. See what's different about Windows Live Hotmail.
> Check it out! <www.windowslive-hotmail.com/learnmore/default.html?
> locale=en-us&ocid=RMT_TAGLM_HMWL_reten_changegood_0507>

> Hello Flow-ers,
> I would like to revisit the question of DNA analysis. We have ~ 12
> year old FacsCalibur and have just upgraded our system to Mac Os X. We
> had ModFit LT 2.0 installed previously. We are having problems
> installing Mac Classic but hopefully this will be resolved soon. From
> the Verity website, it appears that ModFit 3.0 can run off of Mac OS X
> but printing may be an issue.
> http://www.vsh.com/Support/KBDetail.asp?incident=1132
>
> Our lab manager suggested FLOJO
> http://www.flowjo.com/specproliferation.html but this might be too
> sophisticated for our needs.
>
> Does anyone have any recommendations?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jane Turbov
> Department of OBGYN Research
> ENH Research Institute
> 2650 Ridge Avenue
> Evanston, IL 60201
> TEL:  847-570-4021
> FAX: 847-733-5256
>
> From: VSH Tech Support [mailto:Tech@vsh.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 10:30 AM
> To: Cytometry Mailing List
> Subject: RE: DNA analysis software
>
> Hello Ibtissam,
>
>  ModFit LT, for PC or Mac, has advanced modeling capability for
> research applications in DNA cell cycle analysis.  You may use any of
> the model templates the program offers, or create your own models for
> non-traditional analysis, including non-mammalian DNA cell cycle
> studies. ModFit LT can be linked to our WinList program to provide a
> complete cell cycle analysis on any number of sub-populations with a
> single click of a button.
>
>   For an overview, visit http://www.vsh.com/products%a0.
>
>  Best regards,
>
>  Don
>
>  Donald J. Herbert
>  Technical Support Manager
>  Verity Software House
>
>  ________________________________
>
>  From: Ibtissam Abdul-Jabbar [mailto:iajabbar@cicr.uq.edu.au]
>  Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 11:41 PM
>  To: cyto-inbox Subject: DNA analysis software
>
>  Dear All, before buying software to analyse DNA on PC, I would like
> to get your opinion. I already have ModFit for Macintosh.
>
>  What are you using and what do you recommend for research purposes.
>
>  Is MultiCycle Av the one of choice?
>
>  I appreciate your comments.
>
>  Ibtissam A Jabbar (PhD)
>
>   Manager of the FACS facilities
>
>   Diamantina Institute for Cancer, Immunology and Metabolic Medicine
> (DI)
>
>  The University of Queensland
>
>  Level 4 R Wing
>
> Princess Alexandra Hospital
>
> Ipswich Rd Buranda QLD 4102
>
> Australia
>
>  Ph: 07 3240 5945
>
>  Fax: 07 3240 5946
>
>  Mob: 0401154744

> Hello Flow-ers,
> I would like to revisit the question of DNA analysis. We have ~ 12
> year old FacsCalibur and have just upgraded our system to Mac Os X. We
> had ModFit LT 2.0 installed previously. We are having problems
> installing Mac Classic but hopefully this will be resolved soon. From
> the Verity website, it appears that ModFit 3.0 can run off of Mac OS X
> but printing may be an issue.
> http://www.vsh.com/Support/KBDetail.asp?incident=1132
>
> Our lab manager suggested FLOJO
> http://www.flowjo.com/specproliferation.html but this might be too
> sophisticated for our needs.
>
> Does anyone have any recommendations?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jane Turbov
> Department of OBGYN Research
> ENH Research Institute
> 2650 Ridge Avenue
> Evanston, IL 60201
> TEL:  847-570-4021
> FAX: 847-733-5256
>
> From: VSH Tech Support [mailto:Tech@vsh.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 10:30 AM
> To: Cytometry Mailing List
> Subject: RE: DNA analysis software
>
> Hello Ibtissam,
>
>  ModFit LT, for PC or Mac, has advanced modeling capability for
> research applications in DNA cell cycle analysis.  You may use any of
> the model templates the program offers, or create your own models for
> non-traditional analysis, including non-mammalian DNA cell cycle
> studies. ModFit LT can be linked to our WinList program to provide a
> complete cell cycle analysis on any number of sub-populations with a
> single click of a button.
>
>   For an overview, visit http://www.vsh.com/products%a0.
>
>  Best regards,
>
>  Don
>
>  Donald J. Herbert
>  Technical Support Manager
>  Verity Software House
>
>  ________________________________
>
>  From: Ibtissam Abdul-Jabbar [mailto:iajabbar@cicr.uq.edu.au]
>  Sent: Wednesday, February 14, 2007 11:41 PM
>  To: cyto-inbox Subject: DNA analysis software
>
>  Dear All, before buying software to analyse DNA on PC, I would like
> to get your opinion. I already have ModFit for Macintosh.
>
>  What are you using and what do you recommend for research purposes.
>
>  Is MultiCycle Av the one of choice?
>
>  I appreciate your comments.
>
>  Ibtissam A Jabbar (PhD)
>
>   Manager of the FACS facilities
>
>   Diamantina Institute for Cancer, Immunology and Metabolic Medicine
> (DI)
>
>  The University of Queensland
>
>  Level 4 R Wing
>
> Princess Alexandra Hospital
>
> Ipswich Rd Buranda QLD 4102
>
> Australia
>
>  Ph: 07 3240 5945
>
>  Fax: 07 3240 5946
>
>  Mob: 0401154744

> Hi Mike,
>
> Why are you limiting yourself to either an LSR II or a Canto?  You
> should look around as there are other options.  A great deal
> depends on what you need as far as number of colors/parameters,
> physical size limitations to put the instrument in, any knowledge
> of the software running the instrument, etc.    For instance, we have
> both a Canto and a CyAn.  The Canto I we have only does 6 colors,
> the CyAn 9.  The CyAn is about a third the size of the Canto, maybe
> even smaller.  An LSR II outfitted with all the possible PMT's can
> do at least 18 colors, but do you need or anticipate needing this
> capability?  The LSR II is also huge and requires a special bench.
>
> Randy T. Fischer, NIH/NIAMS
> B Cell Biology Group
> 9000 Rockville Pike
> Bldg 10, Room 6D50
> Bethesda, MD 20892
> (301) 594-3537 (voice)
> (301) 402-2209 (fax)
>
> From: Mindy Hankrasky <mhankrasky@hotmail.com>
> Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 13:02:28 -0700
> To: Cytometry Mailing List <cytometry@flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu>
> Subject: LSR II vs. FACScanto
>
> Hi, All,
>
> I am considering to buy a FACS machine. But I have no knowledge
> about the comparison of LSR II and FACScanto. Could someone give me
> suggestion in terms of function and price?
>
> Thanks
>
> Mike
>
> Change is good. See what's different about Windows Live Hotmail.
> Check it out! <www.windowslive-hotmail.com/learnmore/default.html?
> locale=en-us&ocid=RMT_TAGLM_HMWL_reten_changegood_0507>

> From: Cindy Martin <Cindy.Martin@UTSouthwestern.edu>
> Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 14:31:43 -0500
> To: Cytometry Mailing List <cytometry@flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu>
> Subject: Mo Flo vs BD Aria
>
> I am helping set up a new FACS core.    Currently in our lab we use a MoFlo for
> all of our
> sorting.  If you were buying a FACS for sorting mainly SP cells and rare
> embyonic cell
> populations would you purchase the Cytomation MoFlo or the BD FACS Aria?  Also
> for just
> an analyzer, would you prefer Cyan or LSRII? Thank you for your input!
> Best Regards,
> Cindy Martin
>
> Cindy M. Martin, MD
> Cardiology Research Fellow
> UT Southwestern Medical Center
> Dallas, TX  75390-8573
> LAB: (214) 648-5194
> FAX:    (214) 648-1450
> EMAIL: cindy.martin@utsouthwestern.edu

>Alice
>
>I have not discussed a new program with the cytometry community yet,
>but there is a new opportunity we have been working on for nearly 10
>months that I believe is very exciting. This message has a lot of
>information in it - so I hope many of our colleagues will read it all.
>
>After the ISAC congress in May 2006, Gary Durack and myself decided
>to accept the challenge that Stephen Lewis threw at us - "Why can't
>you smart scientists build a really cheap CD4 measuring instrument
>that will work any where?" In talking privately with Stephen Lewis
>it was clear that with some exceptions, the cost of instruments, the
>reliability of instruments and the ability of individuals to use
>instruments in rural areas of Africa was really a challenge. Several
>efforts have been made, but our evaluation is few have succeeded.
>**********************************************************************************************************

>Alice
>
>I have not discussed a new program with the cytometry community yet,
>but there is a new opportunity we have been working on for nearly 10
>months that I believe is very exciting. This message has a lot of
>information in it - so I hope many of our colleagues will read it all.
>
>After the ISAC congress in May 2006, Gary Durack and myself decided
>to accept the challenge that Stephen Lewis threw at us - "Why can't
>you smart scientists build a really cheap CD4 measuring instrument
>that will work any where?" In talking privately with Stephen Lewis
>it was clear that with some exceptions, the cost of instruments, the
>reliability of instruments and the ability of individuals to use
>instruments in rural areas of Africa was really a challenge. Several
>efforts have been made, but our evaluation is few have succeeded.
>
>Gary and I founded a new not-for profit foundation called "Cytometry
>for Life". The goal of the foundation is to build a really cheap,
>robust CD4 cytometer. One that operates on rechargeable batteries,
>is very light, very cheap ($5000) easy to use and has low-cost
>reagents. The unit is designed to work in rural regions where high
>technology mostly fails. This turns out to be the type of
>environment that about 65% of African HIV patients live in. We were
>encouraged by the fact that Mr Lewis came to both Purdue and UI
>where Gary's company is located to see out initial protoypes and
>gave us excellent advice late in 2006.
>
>In the 10 months since the congress, we have made tremendous
>progress. It's not appropriate to give all the details here, but I
>can tell you that we have surveyed health-care experts needs in HIV
>related technologies in Africa (224 with 45-60 minute detailed
>survey), but several of our team including myself have visited
>Nigeria, South Africa, KwaZulu-Natal, Swaziland, Kenya, and Ethiopia
>meeting with government leaders, health care providers, social
>workers, community activists, business leaders, and research scientists.
>
>Not only are we working on the truly low cost technology, but we
>have established on-the-ground efforts in several countries as we
>believe that this is crucial.
>
>As cytometrists, our community really does hold the answer to
>quality CD4 measurements. It's not a dipstick issue, it's not a PCR
>issue, it's a cytometry issue. At least for the moment, this is the
>most accurate and acceptable technology to get the accuracy demanded.
>
>Perhaps in 4 or 5 years other technologies will blossom, but today,
>that's not the case. The reality is with several thousand HIV
>Positive individuals dying daily in Africa, how long will the
>cytometry community wait to provide answers. Certainly there are
>several companies trying hard to bring a variety of technologies to
>the table. Some work well, others are not so useful. Very few work
>in rural areas where the majority of HIV patients live.
>
>"Cytometry for Life" is now a reality. We believe it's time for the
>cytometry community to work together to bring truly low cost tools
>to the people who need them. Antiretroviral therapy is frequently
>linked to CD4 numbers of % of lymphs. Getting these numbers is just
>really difficult. In my own personal experience in Nigeria, a
>population of 140 million with 5-6 million HIV individuals, every
>day in every place I was, the power went off a dozen times a day at
>least. Most people outside major medical centers simply did not have
>access to CD4 tests...and medical staff were pleading for access to
>technologies that they could both afford to buy and to operate. Not
>everyone has $20-40,000 to purchase an instrument. I've been told by
>many colleagues in industry that its not the cost of the cytometer
>that impacts Africa - it's the overall cost of the test. But that's
>not accurate when you talk to the people who actually use the
>tools....and if you look at the actual numbers for costs of tests,
>(for example from our survey) we can document that the actual cost
>institutions are paying is far higher than the "public figure" often
>disclosed.....and for those that challenge this, we can put the real
>numbers up for public review and identify the sites...
>
>We have not disclosed the details on the technology we have
>developed, but it is undoubtedly the simplest flow cytometer every
>designed. It's so simple, most of you would laugh, but not if you
>were HIV positive and lived in rural Africa.
>
>You can find a small amount of information on the website we
>established, http://www.cytometryforlife.org the details of the
>technology are not there, but there is lots of other information. We
>will soon update the site with our findings from several African countries.
>
>"Cytometry for Life" (C4L) is really a down-to-earth program that
>any one can participate in. We have a strong Board of Directors, and
>an excellent Scientific Advisory Board chosen from the cytometry
>community.  If any of you want to put your weight behind this
>program, please email me. I hope that literally hundreds of the
>cytometry community become C4L partners and show that as
>cytometrists, we are taking the HIV epidemic seriously. I applaud
>the cytometry companies for working their hardest to provide
>resources, but the problem is far bigger and needs each and every
>member of the community to assist. We will need help doing our FDA
>certification, testing reagents, advice on training and education,
>in fact there is no shortage of tasks. We have an enormous amount of
>information from our team's travels and meetings, and it really
>tells a tragic story. Naturally, we need to raise funds. I won't say
>how much will be needed, but it's a lot. If you want to donate,
>please do so, if you have colleagues who have the capacity to
>support this effort, please  work with us to provide this opportunity.
>
>I hope you can all support this community effort - every one can
>participate and help to solve this problem. A recent story in the
>newsmedia is at
>http://tinyurl.com/2mooyb
>
>With kind regards,
>
>Paul Robinson
>
>-----------------------------------
>Alice L. Givan wrote:
>>Hello Flowers,
>>Could someone tell me what the current options are for an African
>>lab to acquire a
>>relatively low cost flow cytometer?     Priorities would be for
>>dependability,  rather
>than
>>super high number of parameters.
>>If  you could give me your ideas on vendors and approximate
>>costs,  that would be
>>terrific.  Perhaps it would be best if you would write to me
>>directly -- I will pass
>the
>>compiled information on to the list.
>>Thanks.
>>Alice
>>Alice L. Givan
>>Englert Cell Analysis Laboratory of the Norris Cotton Cancer Center
>>Dartmouth Medical School
>>Lebanon, NH
>>tel 603-7650-7661
>>givan@dartmouth.edu
>
>--
>J. Paul Robinson
>SVM Professor of Cytomics
>Professor of Immunopharmacology & Biomedical Engineering
>Director, Purdue University Cytometry Laboratories
>President, International Society for Analytical Cytology
>
>Purdue University Cytometry Laboratories
>Bindley Bioscience Center
>1203 West State Street
>Discovery Park, Purdue University
>West Lafayette, IN 47907-2057
>Ph (765) 494 0757; Fax (765) 494 0517
>email: jpr@flowcyt.cyto.purdue.edu
>www.cyto.purdue.edu
>
>Join ISAC - www.isac-net.org
>
>Change lives today  - www.cytometryforlife.org

> Dear all,
>
> I have been using BD Calibur for several years but
> recently I try to use FC500 from Coulter for 5 color
> staining. I prepare human PBMCs using Ficoll and fix
> the cells in 2% paraformaldehyde in 1xPBS over night.
> Before I aquire the data on FC500 I run FLOW-check and
> FLOW-set first. I find the cell clusters on FC500 are
> very different, compared to those from Calibur, just
> based on FSC/SSC(Please see the ppt, which is a fixed
> nonstaining sample). 1) Is  the one from FC500
> expected? 2)    What are the possible explainations? 3)
> Do I have problems with FC500 aligment and PMT setup?
> Or are differences caused by differenct machines? 4)
> Is it possible to get similar cell clusters on FC500?
>
> Thank you in advance,
>
> Li
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection.
> Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
> http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html

> This attachment - 'comparsion1.ppt' -  70.66 KBytes - can be viewed at
> http://www.cyto.purdue.edu/MD-parts/db71aebee87bcf2e22c4ffa270aa1fe63c1a4b92.ppt