Re: Single Q-dots for PSF measurement

Posted by Eric Scarfone on
URL: http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/Confocal-List-on-Nabble-tp590120p590127.html

Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal

hello
if I remember well, Q-dots are remarquably bright using multiphoton
excitation (check out the original Zipfel paper). In my hands, using
continuous light sources, they are bright but not that much. I never
tried to dilute them that much that I could visualise subresolution dots.
Eric

 

Eric Scarfone, PhD, CNRS,
Center for Hearing and communication Research
Department of Clinical Neuroscience
Karolinska Institutet

Postal Address:
CFH, M1:02
Karolinska Hospital,
SE-171 76 Stockholm, Sweden

Work:  [phone],
Cell:  [phone]
Fax:   [phone]

email:  [hidden email]
http://www.ki.se/cfh/


----- Original Message -----
From: Lauran Oomen <[hidden email]>
Date: Thursday, August 30, 2007 11:35 am
Subject: Single Q-dots for PSF measurement
To: [hidden email]

> Search the CONFOCAL archive at
> http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
>
> Hello all,
>
> We have tried to use Q-dots for PSF measurements on our confocals,
> but in our hands they are not bright enough and also bleach. I
> guess a number of you have tried Q-Dots as well, since they promise
> to be good sub-resolution targets. I have searched the archive and
> only found a message about this dating back to 2004, also reporting
> negative results. Did anyone successfully use Q-dots as sub-
> resolution targets to measure the PSF of a confocal? If yes, could
> you share your protocol with us?
>
> Lauran
> *************************************
> Lauran Oomen
> The Netherlands Cancer Institute
> Digital Microscopy Facility (H0)
> PO box 90203
> 1006BE Amsterdam
> The Netherlands
> tel: [phone]
> fax: [phone]
>
>