every contributor to his issue (except perhaps one) seem to have
been under the spell of a dedicated AAA instrument config. with all the
concommitant maintenance probs. Understandably there are strengths
associated with a dedicated ( presumeably post-column chemistry) instrument
set-up but if the work-load is at best inconsistant why not adopt a more
flexible and reasonably sensitive chemistry like PITC. After all, this
chemistry seems so adaptable to most hplc on the market or in labs. (new or
old) and can be used on a range of RP-ods columns covering the upper & lower
price range with suitable reproducibilty, cost-effectiveness and OK
sensitivity. So the chem. isn't exactly sub-picomole but atleast it is easy
enough to adapt to most requirements, needs few sophisticated add-ons to
existing hplc set-ups, the reagents are reasonably cheap and of suitable
grade for most applications. Best yet is the fact that with a PITC chem. a
system can turn-around from , say routine RP/tfa analysis to a full-on AAA
capacity within an hour. Fair argument I would say for preserving some of
the obvious benefits of AAA without the problems cited so far... oh yeah, if
labs. are going to shut there facility down remember there are a lot of
peptide-users out there who at sometime will need the humble services of AAA
(& a qualified operator),
regards all,
James Finlayson
Senior Analyst,
AUSPEP pty/ltd
Staffmember at:
AUSPEP PTY.LTD.
P.O.Box 806 Parkville
Vic. 3052 AUSTRALIA
Phn: + 613 9328 1211
Fax: +613 9326 8810