Posted by
Mario Faretta on
URL: http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/Mowiol-and-3D-imaging-tp5845120p5845156.html
*****
To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy*****
Dear Christian,
the main problem with Mowiol and in general with all the mounting media that
become solid over time, is that there is a compression flattening cells. This
effect tend to be obviously worst as time goes on and it is particularly
dramatic in cell monolayers (I tried just for fun to measure nucleus thickness
after 1 week and more than two weeks: staining was perfectly maintained but
cell thickness reduced of more than 50% in 1 week and goes down up to few
microns at the end (at least at the concentration we use)). The point is that
if you need to use confocal generally you do it for a 3D analysis but if you
prepare the sample this way you make it 2D. Depending on the goal of the
experiment Mowiol can be deleterious almost immediately: I remember an old
pubblication in Cytometry from Tom Jovin (hope I am correct) showing apical
and basal membrane fusion at the cell periphery due to mounting media induced
compression...
hope it helps
Mario
Christian Wilms (
[hidden email]) wrote:
>
> *****
> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy > *****
>
> Dear List,
>
> I've read that Mowiol is not considered well suited for 3D imaging:
>
>
> Unfortunately, the authors give no specifics on why that should be the
> case and I also can't find anything on the web. Does anyone have
> details on this?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris
>