Re: Which Procise?

Mark W. Crankshaw (crank@pharmdec.wustl.edu)
Tue, 12 May 1998 14:04:47 -0500

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Howard, Eric F: "Re: Which Procise?"
Previous message: Ulf Hellman: "Re: Reconstitution of CNBr fragments"
Maybe in reply to: Bryan Dunbar: "Which Procise?"
Next in thread: Howard, Eric F: "Re: Which Procise?"

We have the 494 and find the additional cartridges to be worth it. With
Timbuktu software on the Procise Mac and at home I can quickly look at a
sample and determine if it is still showing information and if not stop it
and start the next cartridge. Also, if you are doing short fixed length
runs you can set up two or more to run sequentially (sorry). Finally, we do
all our high sample levels on the D cartridge keeping A,B,C for high
sensitivity work. We previously
have run 470s, 476s, and 477s and the 494 has significantly higher through-put.
Mark.

Mark W. Crankshaw
Dept. of Molecular Biology and Pharmacology
Washington University School of Medicine
PNACL Box 8103
660 S. Euclid Avenue
St. Louis, MO 63110

voice: (314) 362-0285
FAX: (314) 362-4698
email: crank@pharmdec.wustl.edu

Next message: Howard, Eric F: "Re: Which Procise?"
Previous message: Ulf Hellman: "Re: Reconstitution of CNBr fragments"
Maybe in reply to: Bryan Dunbar: "Which Procise?"
Next in thread: Howard, Eric F: "Re: Which Procise?"