http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/Mowiol-and-3D-imaging-tp5845120p5848851.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
> >
>
Dep. Moleculaire Biotechnologie