From owner-celegans@net.bio.net Mon Sep 05 23:00:00 1994
Newsgroups: bionet.celegans
Path: biosci!bcm!cs.utexas.edu!news.uta.edu!eatworms.swmed.edu!leon
From: leon@eatworms.swmed.edu (Leon Avery)
Subject: Re: Hoffman optics for microinjection of C.elegans
Message-ID: <1994Sep6.230456.17960@news.uta.edu>
Sender: news@news.uta.edu (USENET News System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: eatworms.swmed.edu
Organization: University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center
References:  <01HGST2RA8WI90MYP4@LIFE.UAMS.EDU>
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 1994 23:04:56 GMT
Lines: 25

In article <01HGST2RA8WI90MYP4@LIFE.UAMS.EDU>, RJREIS@LIFE.UAMS.EDU writes:
|>   We are in the process of setting up apparatus for transgenic micro-
|> injection.  We would welcome advice on all aspects of this endeavor, but
|> we need a specific question answered ASAP: Does anyone have experience
|> with an alternative to Nomarski optics for (in our case) a Nikon
|> Diaphot inverted scope.  A Nikon rep has suggested Hoffman Modulation
|> Contrast as a cheaper way to go -- but, does it work??
|> 
|>  RSVP to RJREIS@LIFE.UAMS.EDU
|> 
|>     Thanks 10^6.

I once used Hoffman optics on worms during a CSH course.  It was
bloody awful.  You could barely see eggs within an adult.  Forget
about gonad arms or, God forbid, individual cells.  Hoffman, as I
remember it, isn't physically capable of the very sharp focal
sectioning that Nomarski does.  I may be wrong about that: it's been a
long time since I thought about Hoffman optics.

-- 
Leon Avery					   (214) 648-2420 (office)
Department of Biochemistry			            -2768 (lab)
University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center             -8856 (fax)
5323 Harry Hines Blvd				   leon@eatworms.swmed.edu
Dallas, TX  75235-9038

.