RE: Xylene Substitute
<< Previous Message | Next Message >>
From: | "RODRIGUEZ, RICHARD" <RICHARD.RODRIGUEZ@spcorp.com> |
To: | "\"histonet@pathology.swmed.edu\" " <histonet@pathology.swmed.edu>, "\"Hilary Reidy\" " <74420@UDel.Edu> |
Reply-To: | |
Date: | Fri, 15 Oct 1999 08:05:00 -0400 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Hi Hilary,
We used the Shandon xylene substitute for a while, but we have gone
back to xylene. We tested a large group of substitutes and found
Shandon's to be one of the better ones, we were even able to recycle
it! What plagued us was its affinity to collect water which made its
continued use in processing and staining very short. This is an
inherent problem with all of the xylene substitutes and I am in no way
knocking Shandon, they have a good product, but with our high volume
of work, the constant need to change water contaminated reagents was
too much for us to handle. Maybe with a smaller volume of work it may
be easier to control. We typically are processing 300 to 1000
blocks/slides a day for comparison.
Just my 2 cents.
Richard Rodriguez
Schering-Plough Research Institute
Lafayette, NJ
______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________
Subject: Xylene Substitute
Author: "Hilary Reidy" [SMTP:74420@UDel.Edu] at S-P_EXHUB_AM
Date: 10/15/1999 7:44 AM
Hi!
Does anyone use a xylene substitute? If you do, I would like to know how
long you have been using it and how it has performed for you.
Thanks,
Hilary Reidy
University of Delaware
Phone (302)831-8466
e-mail 74420@udel.edu
<< Previous Message | Next Message >>