RE: [Histonet] VEGF

From:"Patsy Ruegg"

I totally agree with you about Santa Cruz's poly VEGF but the mono was much
better.  I have a customer who still wants to use the poly vegf on sheep
placenta and I think it is awful but you have to give the customer what they
want.  I did a comparison with the poly and mono for them but they still
opted for the poly because it matched their molecular studies.  Oh well.  To
me it is all over the place but they seem to think that is expected for
their samples, they think is is real and call it "an expression antibody" or
something like that.

-----Original Message-----
[]On Behalf Of Amos
Sent: Friday, April 09, 2004 2:03 PM
Subject: [Histonet] VEGF

         I'll have to check if we've tried this one when I get back Monday.
If we've not tried it yet, I'll give it a whirl. I know we've tried the
polyclonal before. Generally I cringe when I see a reference to Santa Cruz
though. I've had a number of bum antibodies from them, VEGF polyclonal
being one of them. (I'm sure they have some good ones too, at least I hope
they do). When we work up a new antibody we try just about every
pretreatment beginning with none at all and pick the one that works best.
Thanks for the suggestion. If we haven't tried it yet, and we get it, I'll
post our success or failure here.
Hoping for the best,

At 09:20 PM 4/8/2004, you wrote:
>Message: 16
>Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2004 15:48:28 -0600
>From: "Patsy Ruegg" 
>Subject: RE: [Histonet] Re: Histonet Digest, Vol 5, Issue 11
>To: "Amos Brooks" ,
>Content-Type: text/plain;       charset="US-ASCII"
>Amos I had the same experience as you with VEGF's until I switched to
>monoclonal Vegf from Santa Cruz, it now appears very specific and reliable
>to me.  I use pepsin or proteinase K digestion and stay away from HIER.

Histonet mailing list

Histonet mailing list

<< Previous Message | Next Message >>