Calcium imaging and confocal vs wide field

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Bjorn Tyrberg Bjorn Tyrberg
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Calcium imaging and confocal vs wide field

We have just established an imaging core and we have a user that wants to do live cell
Calcium imaging. I would like to get the communities' advice on how to best do that with
the equipment we have at hand. Any advice is appreciated regarding pros and cons of
different options.

Nikon A1 confocal on a fully motorized Nikon Ti base with resonant scanner and filter based
detection; point scanner with filter based and spectral detection; 402, 457, 477, 488, 514,
561 and 638 nm laser lines.

We also have a wide field fluorescence setup on a Nikon Ti scope with a regular motorized
filter wheel (fast, but not ultra fast), a Mercury excitation source and a Photonics Coolsnap
HQ2 camera.

Thanks in advance!

Bjorn Tyrberg
Faculty advisor, imaging and histology
Burnham Institute Lake Nona, Orlando, FL
Mark Cannell Mark Cannell
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Calcium imaging and confocal vs wide field

This is too open ended to answer IMO.  Perhaps you could define what is
the scientific question he's asking  -including cell system,  time
scale, and quantitative (or not) etc.

For calcium imaging in live cells, experiment design is very important.

Regards Mark Cannell

Bjorn Tyrberg wrote:

> We have just established an imaging core and we have a user that wants to do live cell
> Calcium imaging. I would like to get the communities' advice on how to best do that with
> the equipment we have at hand. Any advice is appreciated regarding pros and cons of
> different options.
>
> Nikon A1 confocal on a fully motorized Nikon Ti base with resonant scanner and filter based
> detection; point scanner with filter based and spectral detection; 402, 457, 477, 488, 514,
> 561 and 638 nm laser lines.
>
> We also have a wide field fluorescence setup on a Nikon Ti scope with a regular motorized
> filter wheel (fast, but not ultra fast), a Mercury excitation source and a Photonics Coolsnap
> HQ2 camera.
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> Bjorn Tyrberg
> Faculty advisor, imaging and histology
> Burnham Institute Lake Nona, Orlando, FL
>  
Bjorn Tyrberg Bjorn Tyrberg
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Calcium imaging and confocal vs wide field

In reply to this post by Bjorn Tyrberg
Sure, his purpose is to use Calcium imaging as a marker for an exocytotic response to
various stimuli in primary pancreatic beta-cells as well as beta-cell lines. A quantitative
method is most likely necessary as he wants to study differences with gene knock down
and with pharmacological inhibitors of certain pathways. Experiments would probably last
from 20 min to an hour.

Bjorn Tyrberg

On Thu, 4 Dec 2008 12:24:45 +1300, Mark Cannell <[hidden email]>
wrote:

>This is too open ended to answer IMO.  Perhaps you could define what is
>the scientific question he's asking  -including cell system,  time
>scale, and quantitative (or not) etc.
>
>For calcium imaging in live cells, experiment design is very important.
>
>Regards Mark Cannell
>
>Bjorn Tyrberg wrote:
>> We have just established an imaging core and we have a user that wants to do live
cell
>> Calcium imaging. I would like to get the communities' advice on how to best do that
with
>> the equipment we have at hand. Any advice is appreciated regarding pros and cons of
>> different options.
>>
>> Nikon A1 confocal on a fully motorized Nikon Ti base with resonant scanner and filter
based
>> detection; point scanner with filter based and spectral detection; 402, 457, 477, 488,
514,
>> 561 and 638 nm laser lines.
>>
>> We also have a wide field fluorescence setup on a Nikon Ti scope with a regular
motorized
>> filter wheel (fast, but not ultra fast), a Mercury excitation source and a Photonics
Coolsnap
>> HQ2 camera.
>>
>> Thanks in advance!
>>
>> Bjorn Tyrberg
>> Faculty advisor, imaging and histology
>> Burnham Institute Lake Nona, Orlando, FL
>>