http://confocal-microscopy-list.275.s1.nabble.com/Fluorophore-excitable-with-405nm-and-488nm-lines-tp6432486p6436624.html
I actually got to evaluate this thing. It was a good product, but EXFO
the high-angle rays from large NA lenses. Since the face of the meter is
oil on. That way you could test your oil and water lenses with the power
>
> For further information, you can visit their website (
>
http://www.ldgi-xcite.com/products-xr2100-xp750.php). Also, I have an
> article coming out next month (July) in BioPhotonics written around
> interviews from users in three key labs (Jen Waters' NIC at Harvard, the YIP
> lab in Canada, and LBL). If you want to chat with someone, get in touch
> with their Sr. Apps Scientist, Dr. Kavita Aswant (P: 1 905 812-3342, E:
>
[hidden email]). I know she'd welcome hearing from you.
>
> Caveat: No commercial interest.
>
> Good hunting!
> Barbara Foster, President and Sr. Consultant
>
> M icroscopy/Microscopy Education
> P: (972)924-5310
> W: <
http://www.microscopyeducation.com/>www.MicroscopyEducation.com
>
>
>
> At 05:09 PM 6/2/2011, Martin Wessendorf wrote:
>
>> *****
>> To join, leave or search the confocal microscopy listserv, go to:
>>
http://lists.umn.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A0=confocalmicroscopy>> *****
>>
>> Dear Daniel--
>>
>> On 6/2/2011 1:59 PM, Daniel Gitler wrote:
>>
>> I am in need of either beads or a fluorophore in solution which is exited
>>> consistently by both the 405nm and 488nm lines of a confocal microscope.
>>> What I really need is that the ratio of excitation should be constant, in
>>> which case two separate dyes are probably not a good choice, unless their
>>> molar ratio can be quite consistent (perhaps in beads?). I also need that
>>> the efficiency of excitation for both lines be quite decent (doesn't have to
>>> be maximal, just decent). Finally (it appears I have a lot of requisites)
>>> the dye/beads should be as insensitive as possible to environmental changes
>>> (i.e., pH etc). The idea is to have a good standard in order to calibrate
>>> the ratio of the power of these two lines when imaging a sample (I do not
>>> need to know the actual number, just a relative measure will do fine).
>>>
>>
>> Based on a quick search, uranium glass looks like a possibility. The
>> absorbance is perhaps 2x better at 488 than 405. However, if you're imaging
>> with a confocal, you would probably need to use point-scanning, since
>> uranium has a loooong fluorescence time-constant (e.g. 170 usec in
>> solution).
>>
>> Here are a few (mediocre) references--they might be a starting point:
>>
>>
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ac00230a029>>
http://webhost.bridgew.edu/cnoda/research/uranyl/index.html>>
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/pssa.2211150136/pdf>>
>> Good luck!
>>
>> Martin
>> --
>> Martin Wessendorf, Ph.D. office: (612) 626-0145
>> Assoc Prof, Dept Neuroscience lab: (612) 624-2991
>> University of Minnesota Preferred FAX: (612) 624-8118
>> 6-145 Jackson Hall, 321 Church St. SE Dept Fax: (612) 626-5009
>> Minneapolis, MN 55455 e-mail:
[hidden email]
>>
>