Welcome to yet another year of operation of the Microscopy Listserver. It was another productive year for all of you, during 2008, the listserver delivered 2238 messages (} 230 Gb of Email) to ~ 3000 subscribers around the world, with only minimal hassels (that I know about).
The complete Microscopy Listserver Archives for 2008-1993 are on-line at http://www.microscopy.com. Those of you that use the archive facility will notice I have decided to no longer produce monthly snap shots of the posting for the search engines. Instead you will only be able to search a full year at a time. I no longer believe these smaller monthly snapshots are important with the ubiquitous access to high speed network connections.
Cheers,
Nestor Your Friendly Neighborhood SysOp
==============================Original Headers============================== 6, 11 -- From zaluzec-at-microscopy.com Thu Jan 1 08:37:35 2009 6, 11 -- Received: from [206.69.208.22] (msdvpn8.msd.anl.gov [130.202.238.72]) 6, 11 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n01EbYjw021867 6, 11 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Thu, 1 Jan 2009 08:37:34 -0600 6, 11 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 6, 11 -- Message-Id: {p06240800c582825929fb-at-[206.69.208.22]} 6, 11 -- Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 08:37:32 -0600 6, 11 -- To: microscopy-at-microscopy.com 6, 11 -- From: "Nestor J. Zaluzec" {zaluzec-at-microscopy.com} 6, 11 -- Subject: Administrivia: Listserver Archives for 2008 6, 11 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" ==============================End of - Headers==============================
One stain is tannic acid/ferric chloride, it's a good alternative to osmium. I've usually used this for membranes, but it does stain things like cytoskeletal proteins and ribosomes pretty well too - it probably binds to certain charged surfaces or groups, like most fixatives.
You can do this a number of ways, the two commonest ones are to either fix first in aldehyde (glutaraldehyde or formaldehyde) in appropriate buffer, rinse well, then stain in 1% tannic acid, rinse well, then stain in 1% ferric chloride. The tissue will go black, just as if it has been osmicated. Then continue as usual - dehydrate, embed.
The alternative is to add the tannic acid in with the aldehyde fixative, which is the way I've usually used it for plant tissues.
The ferric chloride is just made up in distilled water, and you can vary the concentration of either TA or FeCl3, and vary the time, etc.
I imagine you are fixing animal/human tissue (I work on plants only), so just go with whatever is the standard TEM protocol and add the TA/FeCl3 as above. It used to be the case that for reliable results you had to use Mallinkrodt tannic acid, but the manufacturing process used by other companies may be better now.
There are a couple of older references to this which I can dig out - the paper we cite them in is pre-web.....
cheers, from 2009 already downunder... Rosemary White
Dr Rosemary White CSIRO Plant Industry GPO Box 1600 Canberra, ACT 2601 Australia
ph 61 2 6246 5475 fx 61 2 6246 5334
On 1/01/09 7:46 AM, "twigg-at-estd.nrl.navy.mil" {twigg-at-estd.nrl.navy.mil} wrote:
} } } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } This Question/Comment was submitted to the Microscopy Listserver } using the WWW based Form at http://www.microscopy.com/MLFormMail.html } --------------------------------------------------------------------------- } Remember this posting is most likely not from a Subscriber, so when replying } please copy both twigg-at-estd.nrl.navy.mil as well as the } MIcroscopy Listserver } --------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } Email: twigg-at-estd.nrl.navy.mil } Name: Mark Twigg } } Organization: Naval Research Laboratory } } Title-Subject: [Filtered] Stains for proteins } } Question: I have a new project which may entail staining proteins so } that there is more contrast for TEM imaging. One collaborator } recommended osmium tetroxide, but I read on the web that it is rather } poisonous and requires special handling. I have not done this sort } of biological TEM before and I would appreciate any tips or } references. } } Thanks, } } Mark } } Login Host: 132.250.134.121 } --------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } ==============================Original Headers============================== } 8, 11 -- From zaluzec-at-microscopy.com Wed Dec 31 14:38:46 2008 } 8, 11 -- Received: from [206.69.208.22] (mac22.zaluzec.com [206.69.208.22]) } 8, 11 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id } mBVKcjqv024150 } 8, 11 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 14:38:45 -0600 } 8, 11 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 } 8, 11 -- Message-Id: {p06240800c58188c4a985-at-[206.69.208.22]} } 8, 11 -- Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 14:38:45 -0600 } 8, 11 -- To: microscopy-at-microscopy.com } 8, 11 -- From: twigg-at-estd.nrl.navy.mil (by way of MicroscopyListserver) } 8, 11 -- Subject: viaWWW: Stains for proteins } 8, 11 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" } ==============================End of - Headers==============================
Developing a new class is always difficult but more so when you are still in the process of setting up the lab. Regarding your digital question, we are a major research facility that still uses primarily film. Our users come from all areas of the university and have a very wide range of sample types requiring an equally wide range of preparation techniques and original magnifications. I have two equivalent TEMs with one having a 4k digital camera. The camera is rarely used. Why?
For a number of reasons. One is that TEM is a very poor sampling technique. We look at extremely small samples and then extrapolate to the whole. A digital camera, especially a high-resolution bottom mounted one, captures a very small area of the total screen. This makes sampling worse. Yes you can reduce primary magnification to capture a larger area but then the camera is doing the magnification rather than the TEM lenses. This is fine for very low magnification but is not as desirable for higher mag. You can take more digital images but this is time consuming and may not be as informative as a single larger area.
Also, especially when dealing with samples that have a very wide grayscale range, such as negatively stained samples where you often have intense dark areas along with quite light ones, it is often much more difficult to prevent oversaturation with a digital camera due to the enhanced contrast. It often takes longer to get a good digital image as you try to find correct camera settings than to take a negative. You have a hardcopy of your data with a negative that then allows you to scan the negative at whatever resolution value is desirable to get the enlargement you need without being limited to the pixel size of the initial digital image.
Yes there are advantaged to going totally digital. Not having to deal with expense of film and the time for the developing (~20min for 30-40negatives plus some wash time) is preferable to some. You can check focus on the screen and toss any image that is not just right. You need to be able to accurately focus when using film to minimize loss (but I consider this a part of learning to be a good microscopist). You need less beam exposure so this can help with fragile samples. It is easier to work with low contrast samples due to increased camera-provided contrast. I am sure there are many other advantages as well, providing you can afford the initial significant expense of purchasing the camera in the first place.
Our compromise is to teach students to recognize focus and learn to stigmate at high magnification on the screen. Once they "get" this, they can then focus and stigmate whenever and where ever needed with minimal time and effort and get a very high percentage of usable negatives. Time on the scope is normally less than when taking digital images so actual cost (scope time + negatives) is about equal. Students then scan their negatives at resolution desired and have their digital images. We haven't printed at all in about 4 years and only rarely for about 4 years previously to that. Consumer scanners with transmitted light (under $700) do fine for this purpose as do inkjet printers although students prefer to look at images on screen and rarely print them.
There is certainly a place for digital cameras, especially when you are taking low mag images and need to get results in a hurry such as in a diagnostic situation. It is very helpful for the occasional user who has problems focusing well and can be quite adequate/desirable for other needs, such as electron diffraction, as you can get a good dynamic range. Just do not feel that this is a must purchase for an undergraduate course when the $$ can perhaps better go to other preparation equipment or supplies.
Regarding use of nitrogen...I admit that I am old school. Lots of samples are very stable under the beam and contamination is not a hugh problem with modern pumping systems...especially at low magnifications where reductions in resolution due to contamination are not easily visible. But as soon as we say that, someone will come along with a sample that is not stable and you end up with a lot of contamination released into the column and adverse effects as a result. Part of keeping a common facility up and running is to train all users to do things in the same methodical manner. This greatly reduces user error. I would rather err on the side of caution and require everyone to use nitrogen than hope that students will recognize when it is desirable. THAT WON"T HAPPEN!
My recommendation is to get two 25L dewars so that one can be off getting filled while the other is available as needed. You will probably only have to fill once every few weeks or so and hopefully there is a larger tank some where on campus to make this possible.
Debby
--- Debby Sherman, Director Phone: 765-494-6666 Life Science Microscopy Facility FAX: 765-494-5896 Purdue University E-mail: dsherman-at-purdue.edu S-052 Whistler Building 170 S. University Street West Lafayette, IN 47907 http://www.agriculture.purdue.edu/microscopy
On 12/31/08 7:32 PM, "kamlennon-at-yahoo.com" {kamlennon-at-yahoo.com} wrote:
} } } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } Hi All, } } It's been a few years since I've been on the list server - doing those } recommended postdocs to "broaden my horizons" beyond microscopy (I'm wondering } if I should have followed that advice!). } } I'm gearing up to teach an EM class for biologists to undergrads. The class } hasn't been taught at my university in eons, so I'm basically starting from } scratch with a great set of brand new JEOL scopes and a lab full of virgin } equipment. It would be a dream come true if not for the fact that I've got to } learn how to use all of this brand new equipment in short order! } } I'm sure that I'll be in touch throughout the upcoming semester, but for now, } I have a few questions on which I'd like your learned advice: } } 1. Does anyone have experience with a JEOL JEM1011 TEM? Thoughts on it? Do } you have an abbreviated user's protocol that you would be willing to share? No } one here has ever used this brand new (though 5 year old scope), and, though } JEOL will graciously come and do a training session with me, I'd love any } input you may have. } } 2. Going digital. We are looking at getting a digital image capture system. } I'm old enough to have been trained in the darkroom long ago. Should I teach } these students darkroom technique or just assume that they're in the digital } age and go with either digital capture or digital image manipulation (scanning } in EM negatives and printing)? Vote and let me know. And, if you've got a } camera system, scanner or printer that you would recommend, that would be } great. } } 3. Lastly, and this may show the old workhorse microscopes I was weaned on - } LN2. I've been advised to just forget about using LN2 with this TEM for } biological applications. Really? Granted, I'll talk to the JEOL rep about } this, but if you've got thoughts on it, please share. I hear that getting LN2 } into our lab may be a problem, but my gut tells me that I should make ripples } with this one. } } 4. Okay, one more, but it's an easy one. Does anyone have a recommendation for } a quick and easy animal tissue to use for teaching? I'm a die hard plant } person (perfusion - ahh!), but I think that not having experience handling and } looking at animal tissue has been a handicap for me. I don't want that for my } students. Can I just go pick up some chicken livers or something and not have } to find something to sacrifice? } } That's it for now. I know that there will be more. } } Many thanks, } Kristen } } Kristen A. Lennon, Ph.D. } Lecturer, Department of Biology } 202 Compton Science Center } Frostburg State University } 101 Braddock Road } Frostburg, MD 21532 } k.lennon-at-frostburg.edu } } } } } ==============================Original Headers============================== } 13, 20 -- From kamlennon-at-yahoo.com Wed Dec 31 18:30:31 2008 } 13, 20 -- Received: from web84007.mail.mud.yahoo.com } (web84007.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.206.177]) } 13, 20 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with SMTP id } n010UVQW011058 } 13, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.com} ; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 18:30:31 -0600 } 13, 20 -- Received: (qmail 23609 invoked by uid 60001); 1 Jan 2009 00:30:30 } -0000 } 13, 20 -- DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; } 13, 20 -- s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; } 13, 20 -- } h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Con } tent-Type:Message-ID; } 13, 20 -- } b=CqDVTUJAqH9OmwKIT05TcFhilN8W5b4TH4VVVw3XGiIuPorbXVxCisHm0it7iPSLaS9sjsY/Lhme } JNa3JpJo/lOiIKMqBLserDqmQ1+3yFel3/IfzViKtTyyx4AUo6roq5dZ4iDp7nUrjnWr7aoXqkXozP } M4YrBTri8ScUff9eU=; } 13, 20 -- X-YMail-OSG: } KuV9JQgVM1kqFtyeJQ5xhd81MO9MDtVbiXwLAuz7_j.epu5Np3DdPvW8kKX1n_x9ZA-- } 13, 20 -- Received: from [96.239.149.81] by web84007.mail.mud.yahoo.com via } HTTP; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 16:30:30 PST } 13, 20 -- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.7.247.3 } 13, 20 -- Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 16:30:30 -0800 (PST) } 13, 20 -- From: Kristen Lennon {kamlennon-at-yahoo.com} } 13, 20 -- Reply-To: kamlennon-at-yahoo.com } 13, 20 -- Subject: Developing EM class for undergrads + going digital advice? } 13, 20 -- To: Microscopy-at-Microscopy.com } 13, 20 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 } 13, 20 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii } 13, 20 -- Message-ID: {295847.22686.qm-at-web84007.mail.mud.yahoo.com} } ==============================End of - Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 18, 32 -- From dsherman-at-purdue.edu Thu Jan 1 10:23:12 2009 18, 32 -- Received: from mailhub131.itcs.purdue.edu (mailhub131.itcs.purdue.edu [128.210.5.131]) 18, 32 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n01GNBma021014 18, 32 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Thu, 1 Jan 2009 10:23:11 -0600 18, 32 -- Received: from mailhub126.itcs.purdue.edu (mailhub126.itcs.purdue.edu [128.210.5.126]) 18, 32 -- by mailhub131.itcs.purdue.edu (8.14.2/8.14.2/smtp-nopmx) with ESMTP id n01GNAEQ002896; 18, 32 -- Thu, 1 Jan 2009 11:23:10 -0500 18, 32 -- Received: from 1061exfe04a.itap.purdue.edu (1061exfe04a.itap.purdue.edu [128.210.1.11]) 18, 32 -- by mailhub126.itcs.purdue.edu (8.14.2/8.14.2/exchange-outbound) with ESMTP id n01GNASW018749; 18, 32 -- Thu, 1 Jan 2009 11:23:10 -0500 18, 32 -- Received: from exch04.purdue.lcl ([172.21.6.24]) by 1061exfe04a.itap.purdue.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); 18, 32 -- Thu, 1 Jan 2009 11:23:09 -0500 18, 32 -- Received: from 98.228.28.11 ([98.228.28.11]) by EXCH04.purdue.lcl ([172.21.6.26]) via Exchange Front-End Server exch.itap.purdue.edu ([128.210.63.104]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; 18, 32 -- Thu, 1 Jan 2009 16:22:35 +0000 18, 32 -- User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.15.0.081119 18, 32 -- Date: Thu, 01 Jan 2009 11:22:34 -0500 18, 32 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] Developing EM class for undergrads + going digital 18, 32 -- advice? 18, 32 -- From: Debby Sherman {dsherman-at-purdue.edu} 18, 32 -- To: {kamlennon-at-yahoo.com} , "message to: MSA list" {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 18, 32 -- Message-ID: {C58257FA.2535C%dsherman-at-purdue.edu} 18, 32 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] Developing EM class for undergrads + going digital 18, 32 -- advice? 18, 32 -- Thread-Index: AclsLSb5DjLGwKQiCUGlT29ZAf6ywQ== 18, 32 -- In-Reply-To: {200901010032.n010WP7K014214-at-ns.microscopy.com} 18, 32 -- Mime-version: 1.0 18, 32 -- Content-type: text/plain; 18, 32 -- charset="US-ASCII" 18, 32 -- Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit 18, 32 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 01 Jan 2009 16:23:09.0837 (UTC) FILETIME=[3C560BD0:01C96C2D] 18, 32 -- X-PMX-Version: 5.4.0.320885 18, 32 -- X-PerlMx-Virus-Scanned: Yes ==============================End of - Headers==============================
I'm sure the government was regulations and requirements which make using osmium tetroxide difficult, but like most chemical, osmium tetroxide can be safely used. At rubber company in Akron we used a water dilution of osmium tetroxide both as vapor phase to stain thin sections of unsaturated rubber and added it to latex rubber has a hardener. We worked in a chemical hood, wore thin nitrile rubber gloves used normal chemical practices and never experienced a problem.
The vials crystal osmium were scored, broken and dropped into distilled water (we used a taped wrapped bottle to protect the solution from light) and small amounts were removed from the bottle with clean pasture pipets. The used solutions were decanted into a open wide mouth bottle stored in the back of the hood. The water evaporated, the osmium reacted with dust and organic material in the air and once a year we properly discarded the sludge. We also placed the used TEM grids, used vials and latex solutions in that bottle.
If you get the results you want from other stains that's great. But don't let scary internet precautions and many of the warnings we read persuade you from using chemicals.
Too often, people with limited chemical experience and education make difficult rules not to protect you, but to protect the organization from imagined legal complications. These people are not charged with solving the problems your are responsible for and have limited if any sympathy if you are unable to achieve these goals due to their restrictions.
twigg-at-estd.nrl.na vy.mil To 12/31/2008 03:48 frank_karl-at-lincolnelectric.com PM cc
Subject Please respond to [Microscopy] viaWWW: Stains for twigg-at-estd.nrl.na proteins vy.mil
The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America
This Question/Comment was submitted to the Microscopy Listserver using the WWW based Form at http://www.microscopy.com/MLFormMail.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember this posting is most likely not from a Subscriber, so when replying please copy both twigg-at-estd.nrl.navy.mil as well as the MIcroscopy Listserver ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: twigg-at-estd.nrl.navy.mil Name: Mark Twigg
Organization: Naval Research Laboratory
Title-Subject: [Filtered] Stains for proteins
Question: I have a new project which may entail staining proteins so that there is more contrast for TEM imaging. One collaborator recommended osmium tetroxide, but I read on the web that it is rather poisonous and requires special handling. I have not done this sort of biological TEM before and I would appreciate any tips or references.
==============================Original Headers============================== 8, 11 -- From zaluzec-at-microscopy.com Wed Dec 31 14:38:46 2008 8, 11 -- Received: from [206.69.208.22] (mac22.zaluzec.com [206.69.208.22]) 8, 11 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id mBVKcjqv024150 8, 11 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Wed, 31 Dec 2008 14:38:45 -0600 8, 11 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 8, 11 -- Message-Id: {p06240800c58188c4a985-at-[206.69.208.22]} 8, 11 -- Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 14:38:45 -0600 8, 11 -- To: microscopy-at-microscopy.com 8, 11 -- From: twigg-at-estd.nrl.navy.mil (by way of MicroscopyListserver) 8, 11 -- Subject: viaWWW: Stains for proteins 8, 11 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" ==============================End of - Headers==============================
-- ************************************************************* Note: The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Thank you, The Lincoln Electric Company **************************************************************
==============================Original Headers============================== 27, 22 -- From frank_karl-at-lincolnelectric.com Fri Jan 2 06:12:27 2009 27, 22 -- Received: from lincolnelectric.com (smtp2.lincolnelectric.com [64.109.211.115]) 27, 22 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n02CCRJv027990 27, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 2 Jan 2009 06:12:27 -0600 27, 22 -- In-Reply-To: {200812312048.mBVKmOhZ004457-at-ns.microscopy.com} 27, 22 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] viaWWW: Stains for proteins 27, 22 -- To: twigg-at-estd.nrl.navy.mil, Microscopy-at-microscopy.com 27, 22 -- X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.4 March 27, 2005 27, 22 -- Message-ID: {OF639C253E.DA709F59-ON85257532.0040B9C6-85257532.00430824-at-lincolnelectric.com} 27, 22 -- Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 07:12:12 -0500 27, 22 -- From: Frank_Karl-at-lincolnelectric.com 27, 22 -- X-MIMETrack: CD-MIME by Router on Notescom1/Lincoln Electric/US(Release 8.0.1|February 27, 22 -- 07, 2008) at 01/02/2009 07:12:13 AM, 27, 22 -- CD-MIME complete at 01/02/2009 07:12:13 AM, 27, 22 -- Itemize by Router on Notescom1/Lincoln Electric/US(Release 8.0.1|February 27, 22 -- 07, 2008) at 01/02/2009 07:12:13 AM, 27, 22 -- Serialize by Router on Notescom1/Lincoln Electric/US(Release 8.0.1|February 27, 22 -- 07, 2008) at 01/02/2009 07:12:13 AM, 27, 22 -- Serialize complete at 01/02/2009 07:12:13 AM 27, 22 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 27, 22 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 27, 22 -- charset="US-ASCII" ==============================End of - Headers==============================
2. Going digital. We are looking at getting a digital image capture system. I'm old enough to have been trained in the darkroom long ago. Should I teach these students darkroom technique or just assume that they're in the digital age and go with either digital capture or digital image manipulation (scanning in EM negatives and printing)? Vote and let me know. And, if you've got a camera system, scanner or printer that you would recommend, that would be great.
Hi Kristen, I've used glass plates, cut film and digital imaging. I love the darkroom work as well as the incredible images one gets from printing negatives with the right "hardness" of paper, developer time and chemistry. With true dedication you could take 20 images with the TEM, drop the vacuum, remove the cassette, replace the cassette with a pre-pumped one (to lower the water content and make your TEM pump down faster). If the negative chemistry was at the proper temperature and not used up, you could develop, dry the negative, then calibrate the enlarger, make sure the paper chemistry was hot and not used up, determine the correct exposure, (it always seemed to vary from negative to negative), print, develop, then repeat with dodging or burning the image to bring out the details you need, dry the paper, (used RC paper so you don't need a print dryer) and in eight hours you could have two or three exceptional copies of each of the 20 negatives. (OH! I forgot make sure you record and identify the negatives and store them so in twenty years someone will have several 100 pounds of polyester film to dispose of.)
Or you could focus the microscope, move a lever or two, capture the image, print it on a quality printer, decide if you want the image, correct the exposure and composition and take another images. Yes, they are not as nice as "photographs". But with the right paper, and a quality camera (that means lots of bucks, pounds or yen) you can get an images 99% as good and all in less then 3 minutes.
Digital, I dislike it, but it is the way to go........,
Stay safe........ Frank Karl....... microscopist and former darkroom junkie
-- ************************************************************* Note: The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Thank you, The Lincoln Electric Company **************************************************************
==============================Original Headers============================== 8, 23 -- From frank_karl-at-lincolnelectric.com Fri Jan 2 06:37:14 2009 8, 23 -- Received: from lincolnelectric.com (smtp2.lincolnelectric.com [64.109.211.115]) 8, 23 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n02CbCiG015828 8, 23 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 2 Jan 2009 06:37:13 -0600 8, 23 -- In-Reply-To: {200901010037.n010ba2u023805-at-ns.microscopy.com} 8, 23 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] Developing EM class for undergrads + going digital advice? 8, 23 -- Sensitivity: 8, 23 -- To: kamlennon-at-yahoo.com, Microscopy-at-microscopy.com 8, 23 -- X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.4 March 27, 2005 8, 23 -- Message-ID: {OF1BAFA938.E4D83FCB-ON85257532.00432A06-85257532.004548CB-at-lincolnelectric.com} 8, 23 -- Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 07:36:48 -0500 8, 23 -- From: Frank_Karl-at-lincolnelectric.com 8, 23 -- X-MIMETrack: CD-MIME by Router on Notescom1/Lincoln Electric/US(Release 8.0.1|February 8, 23 -- 07, 2008) at 01/02/2009 07:36:49 AM, 8, 23 -- CD-MIME complete at 01/02/2009 07:36:49 AM, 8, 23 -- Itemize by Router on Notescom1/Lincoln Electric/US(Release 8.0.1|February 8, 23 -- 07, 2008) at 01/02/2009 07:36:49 AM, 8, 23 -- Serialize by Router on Notescom1/Lincoln Electric/US(Release 8.0.1|February 8, 23 -- 07, 2008) at 01/02/2009 07:36:49 AM, 8, 23 -- Serialize complete at 01/02/2009 07:36:49 AM 8, 23 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 8, 23 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 8, 23 -- charset="US-ASCII" ==============================End of - Headers==============================
This Question/Comment was submitted to the Microscopy Listserver using the WWW based Form at http://microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/MLFormMail.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember this posting is most likely not from a Subscriber, so when replying please copy both Rod-at-RJAndA.com as well as the MIcroscopy Listserver ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: Rod-at-RJAndA.com Name: Rod Johnson
Organization: Rod Johnson & Associates, Inc.
Title-Subject: [Filtered] JEOL top reference holders
Question: Happy New Year!
We purchased a used JEOL 840 this year. We are looking for 1 1/4 inch top reference holders. If you have holders you are no longer using we would be pleased to pay for them and their shipping.
Here is the January 2009 Microscopy Today table of contents. We will close the subscription list for this issue on Wednesday, January 7, 2009. Microscopists in North America and MSA members anywhere qualify for free subscriptions. Anyone else may subscribe for US$60 per year (to PARTIALLY cover postage). All subscriptions at http://www.microscopy-today.com .
Thank you, Ron Anderson, Technical Editor ===================== Tiny Bubbles Stephen W. Carmichael, Mayo Clinic
New Large Area Silicon Drift Detectors - Fast Analysis without Compromise Clair Collins, Neil Rowlands, Peter Statham, and James Holland, Oxford Instruments, High Wycombe, Bucks, England
Microscopy Today New Publication Directions Ron Anderson and Charles Lyman,*Microscopy Today, Largo, FL and *Lehigh University Bethlehem, PA
Manufacturer Training of Electron Microscopy and Analysis Techniques Neil Rowlands, Oxford Instruments, Concord, MA
Remote Microscopy for Education and Outreach S. Seraphin, S. Hernandez, G. Chandler, D. Bentley*, K. Dorame, M. Sellers,** Univ. of Arizona, Tucson, AZ, * ** N. Arizona Univ., Flagstaff, AZ
The Electron Microscopy Database: an Online Resource for Teaching and Learning Quantitative Transmission Electron Microscopy Paul M. Voyles, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Madison, WI
SEM Short Courses for Industry: the Lehigh Microscopy School as an example Charles E. Lyman, Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA
Direct Visualisation, Sizing and Counting of Virus and Phage Particles in Liquids Bob Carr, and Duncan Griffiths,* NanoSight Ltd., Salisbury, UK, *NanoSight USA, Costa Mesa, CA
Pioneers in Optics: Ernst Abbe (1840-1905) Michael W. Davidson, The Florida State Univ., Tallahassee, FL
Single-Molecule DNA Stretching Using Optical Tweezers Joost van Mameren, Anna Wozniak, and Sid Ragona,* JPK Instruments, Berlin, Germany, *Ragona Scientific, Pittsford, NY
Event Streamed Spectrum Imaging using Programmed Beam Acquisition in Biological Microprobe Analysis P. Ingram,* S. D. Davilla,** & A. LeFurgey*, *Duke Univ. and Veterans Affairs Med. Ctr, Durham, NC, **4pi Analysis Inc., Durham, NC
RGB-Splitting and Multi-Shot Techniques in Digital Photomicrography–Utilization of Astronomic RGB-Filters in True Color Imaging Jörg Piper, Clinic “Meduna,” Bad Bertrich, Germany
Preventing the Sale of Fraudulent Gemstones using Non-Destructive X-Ray Fluoresence Spectroscopy Mary S. Goldman, Dan L. Davis, Robert H. Clifford, Shimadzu Scientific Instruments Inc., Columbia, MD
Industry News
NetNotes SPECIMEN PREPARATION - glutaraldehyde shelf life SPECIMEN PREPARATION – Spurr’s resin SPECIMEN PREPARATION – processing paraffin specimens for TEM MICROTOMY – flattening sections MICROTOMY – wetting the knife MICROTOMY - coated grids IMMUNOCYTOCHEMISTRY - fluorescence quenching IMAGE PROCESSING - reference image subtraction TEM – image distortion TEM – comparison with STEM SEM – backscattering detector image formation SEM – backscatter detector SEM - Coating for focused ion beam (FIB) SEM SEM – active and passive acquisition EM - SF6 detector EM - CTF function EM – pump speed vs. ultimate pressure EM - plasma cleaner SEM – oil shale rock sample preparation SEM - of paper
Dear Abbe
Advertiser's Index
==============================Original Headers============================== 20, 17 -- From randerson20-at-tampabay.rr.com Fri Jan 2 16:20:44 2009 20, 17 -- Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com (hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com [71.74.56.125]) 20, 17 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n02MKiqJ029455 20, 17 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Fri, 2 Jan 2009 16:20:44 -0600 20, 17 -- Received: from [127.0.0.1] (really [24.73.73.214]) 20, 17 -- by hrndva-omta01.mail.rr.com with ESMTP 20, 17 -- id {20090102222042.RAZV6232.hrndva-omta01.mail.rr.com-at-[127.0.0.1]} 20, 17 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Fri, 2 Jan 2009 22:20:42 +0000 20, 17 -- Message-ID: {495E9335.8050806-at-tampabay.rr.com} 20, 17 -- Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:20:37 -0500 20, 17 -- From: Ron Anderson {randerson20-at-tampabay.rr.com} 20, 17 -- User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209) 20, 17 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 20, 17 -- To: Listserver {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} 20, 17 -- Subject: January 2009 Microscopy Today Table of Contents 20, 17 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed 20, 17 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit ==============================End of - Headers==============================
We have the following equipment that we would like to find new homes for: Lynx EL Tissue Processor and supplies Digital Dryer (brand new, table top) Arkay CD 20 dryer 2-Codonics NP 1600 printers (brand new with supplies)
Photos are available upon request.
Priced as a donation to Valley Catholic High School EM Lab and shipping costs, take one or all!
Thank you,
Hobie
Hobie Richards Partner, and COO Technical Sales Solutions, LLC Portland, OR USA www.TechnicalSalesSolutions.com 503 781 0428
Skype Hobie-TSS
==============================Original Headers============================== 11, 21 -- From Hobie-at-technicalsalessolutions.com Sat Jan 3 13:21:10 2009 11, 21 -- Received: from host203.com (host203.com [203.194.159.243]) 11, 21 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n03JL8xC008261 11, 21 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Sat, 3 Jan 2009 13:21:09 -0600 11, 21 -- Received: (qmail 8983 invoked by uid 503); 3 Jan 2009 19:21:05 -0000 11, 21 -- Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.0.1.195?) (Hobie-at-76.115.10.232) 11, 21 -- by host203.com with ESMTPA; 3 Jan 2009 19:21:05 -0000 11, 21 -- User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.0.0.071130 11, 21 -- Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2009 11:20:58 -0800 11, 21 -- Subject: Extra Lab Items 11, 21 -- From: Hobie Richards {Hobie-at-technicalsalessolutions.com} 11, 21 -- To: {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 11, 21 -- Message-ID: {C584FA9A.16024%Hobie-at-technicalsalessolutions.com} 11, 21 -- Thread-Topic: Extra Lab Items 11, 21 -- Thread-Index: AcltJOhHkhtkCvXFM0ae5WxF7iwr5wAAVa5wACyKOCs= 11, 21 -- In-Reply-To: {C583CFB3.15FF3%Hobie-at-technicalsalessolutions.com} 11, 21 -- Mime-version: 1.0 11, 21 -- Content-type: text/plain; 11, 21 -- charset="ISO-8859-1" 11, 21 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 11, 21 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n03JL8xC008261 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
Tracor Northern: PAC Control Console Joystick/Keypad MicroScan Trackball/Slide Controller 2) Programmable Auto Controllers (steel boxes with boards) Connector Box
We came across the above surplus items we acquired and never used. Not wanting to throw these out if anyone can use them, we will happily box them up for you. They will be yours for the cost of shipping.
Alan Stone ASTON Metallurgical Services Co., Inc. Wheeling, IL
==============================Original Headers============================== 6, 19 -- From as-at-astonmet.com Sat Jan 3 14:52:49 2009 6, 19 -- Received: from outbound1.mail.tds.net (outbound1.mail.tds.net [216.170.230.91]) 6, 19 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n03Kqm16023434 6, 19 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Sat, 3 Jan 2009 14:52:49 -0600 6, 19 -- Received: from outaamta01.mail.tds.net (outaamta01.mail.tds.net [216.170.230.31]) 6, 19 -- by outbound1.mail.tds.net (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id n03KqlMP023000 6, 19 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Sat, 3 Jan 2009 14:52:47 -0600 6, 19 -- Received: from OFFICE.astonmet.com ([69.128.246.226]) 6, 19 -- by outaamta01.mail.tds.net with ESMTP 6, 19 -- id {20090103205247.VXVJ26415.outaamta01.mail.tds.net-at-OFFICE.astonmet.com} 6, 19 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Sat, 3 Jan 2009 14:52:47 -0600 6, 19 -- Message-Id: {6.2.0.14.2.20090103144053.02423dd0-at-pop.tds.net} 6, 19 -- X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.0.14 6, 19 -- Date: Sat, 03 Jan 2009 14:51:33 -0600 6, 19 -- To: microscopy-at-microscopy.com 6, 19 -- From: Alan Stone {as-at-astonmet.com} 6, 19 -- Subject: Cleaning House......Tracor Northern Parts 6, 19 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 6, 19 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed ==============================End of - Headers==============================
This Question/Comment was submitted to the Microscopy Listserver using the WWW based Form at http://www.microscopy.org/MicroscopyListserver/MLFormMail.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember this posting is most likely not from a Subscriber, so when replying please copy both opmills-at-mtu.edu as well as the MIcroscopy Listserver ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: opmills-at-mtu.edu Name: Owen Mills
Organization: Michigan Technological University
Title-Subject: [Filtered] wanted - 4pi SE II electronics
Question: We'd like to buy (a donation would not hurt my feelings :} ) a 4pi SE II x-ray system. I really only need the control box, PCI slot card and cables since we have a working detector and HV power supply. Please contact me off-line at opmills-at-mtu.edu.
International Conference on PROCESSING & MANUFACTURING OF ADVANCED MATERIALS Processing, Fabrication, Properties, Applications August 25-29, 2009, Technical University-Berlin, Germany www.thermec.uow.edu.au
best regards KJ Hübner
____________ Virus checked by G DATA AntiVirus Version: AVF 19.204 from 29.12.2008 Virus news: www.gdata.pl
==============================Original Headers============================== 5, 26 -- From hubner-at-iod.krakow.pl Mon Jan 5 05:48:55 2009 5, 26 -- Received: from sowa.iod.krakow.pl (sowa.IOd.krakow.pl [149.156.29.201]) 5, 26 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n05BmsD2031012 5, 26 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 5 Jan 2009 05:48:55 -0600 5, 26 -- Received: from SERWER_SQL (serwer_sql [149.156.29.202]) 5, 26 -- by sowa.iod.krakow.pl (8.13.6+Sun/8.13.6) with SMTP id n05BRhvs015278 5, 26 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 5 Jan 2009 12:27:43 +0100 (CET) 5, 26 -- Received: from [149.156.29.4] (helo=iodkh007) 5, 26 -- by SERWER_SQL with AVK MailGateway; 5, 26 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 05 Jan 2009 12:50:21 +0100 5, 26 -- Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 12:48:53 +0100 5, 26 -- From: =?iso-8859-2?Q?Krzysztof_H=FCbner?= {hubner-at-iod.krakow.pl} 5, 26 -- To: "Microscopy list" {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 5, 26 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 5, 26 -- Message-ID: {8378428096D94ACBA990809C5149F148-at-iodkh007} 5, 26 -- Subject: conference Thermec 2009 Berlin 5, 26 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 5, 26 -- charset="iso-8859-2"; 5, 26 -- format="flowed"; 5, 26 -- reply-type="original" 5, 26 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 5, 26 -- X-Priority: 3 5, 26 -- X-MSMail-Priority: Normal 5, 26 -- X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512 5, 26 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 5, 26 -- X-AVK-Virus-Check: AVF 19.204;29.12.2008 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
Hope this isn't too late - CMU shuts down over Christmas.
Good luck with the new class. Undergrads can be much better at things like EM than people give them credit for (from experience with our EM classes). I can't help you with the JEOL, we have a Philips, but more generally:
2. Do both. Shoot film negatives and digital. Debby Sherman has already provided excellent reasons for keeping the film negatives, so I won't repeat those. I think it's worthwhile doing digital imaging in addition because first, many labs are going that way, and you have an opportunity to train students in the proper use of a digital system, second, as Debby mentioned, it's cheaper to operate (no chemicals, etc.) and so a useful system for teaching focus and stigmation, and for quick checks of sections. If this is an either-or decision, keep the film. The digital system can be learned whereever the students go.
4. Crickets. We use cricket tissues in our TEM class. The femur provides plenty of muscle, which has lots of interesting and easily identifiable structures. Plus, it allows some basic study of structure/ function, something that is missing from many microscopy classes and shouldn't be. Fix the tissue in contracted and stretched conditions, for example. Further, there are lots of other interesting tissues: midgut, ventral nerve cord, brain, Malphigian tubules, and so on. Also, since many sections will contain tracheoles, there is another chance to discuss physiology and microanatomy.
Phil
} Hi All, } } It's been a few years since I've been on the list server - doing } those recommended postdocs to "broaden my horizons" beyond } microscopy (I'm wondering if I should have followed that advice!). } } I'm gearing up to teach an EM class for biologists to undergrads. } The class hasn't been taught at my university in eons, so I'm } basically starting from scratch with a great set of brand new JEOL } scopes and a lab full of virgin equipment. It would be a dream come } true if not for the fact that I've got to learn how to use all of } this brand new equipment in short order! } } I'm sure that I'll be in touch throughout the upcoming semester, but } for now, I have a few questions on which I'd like your learned } advice: } } 1. Does anyone have experience with a JEOL JEM1011 TEM? Thoughts on } it? Do you have an abbreviated user's protocol that you would be } willing to share? No one here has ever used this brand new (though 5 } year old scope), and, though JEOL will graciously come and do a } training session with me, I'd love any input you may have. } } 2. Going digital. We are looking at getting a digital image capture } system. I'm old enough to have been trained in the darkroom long } ago. Should I teach these students darkroom technique or just assume } that they're in the digital age and go with either digital capture } or digital image manipulation (scanning in EM negatives and } printing)? Vote and let me know. And, if you've got a camera system, } scanner or printer that you would recommend, that would be great. } } 3. Lastly, and this may show the old workhorse microscopes I was } weaned on - LN2. I've been advised to just forget about using LN2 } with this TEM for biological applications. Really? Granted, I'll } talk to the JEOL rep about this, but if you've got thoughts on it, } please share. I hear that getting LN2 into our lab may be a problem, } but my gut tells me that I should make ripples with this one. } } 4. Okay, one more, but it's an easy one. Does anyone have a } recommendation for a quick and easy animal tissue to use for } teaching? I'm a die hard plant person (perfusion - ahh!), but I } think that not having experience handling and looking at animal } tissue has been a handicap for me. I don't want that for my } students. Can I just go pick up some chicken livers or something and } not have to find something to sacrifice? } } That's it for now. I know that there will be more. } } Many thanks, } Kristen } } Kristen A. Lennon, Ph.D. } Lecturer, Department of Biology } 202 Compton Science Center } Frostburg State University } 101 Braddock Road } Frostburg, MD 21532 } k.lennon-at-frostburg.edu
-- Philip Oshel Microscopy Facility Supervisor Biology Department 024C Brooks Hall Central Michigan University Mt. Pleasant, MI 48859 (989) 774-3576
==============================Original Headers============================== 8, 26 -- From oshel1pe-at-cmich.edu Mon Jan 5 10:12:43 2009 8, 26 -- Received: from ob4.cmich.edu (ob4.cmich.edu [141.209.20.25]) 8, 26 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n05GCh4d019121 8, 26 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 5 Jan 2009 10:12:43 -0600 8, 26 -- Received: from egatea.central.cmich.local ([141.209.15.74]) 8, 26 -- by ob4.cmich.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id n05GCa96007385 8, 26 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 5 Jan 2009 11:12:42 -0500 8, 26 -- Received: from [141.209.160.249] ([141.209.160.249]) by egatea.central.cmich.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); 8, 26 -- Mon, 5 Jan 2009 11:12:19 -0500 8, 26 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 8, 26 -- Message-Id: {f06240808c587debf7f93-at-[141.209.160.249]} 8, 26 -- In-Reply-To: {200901010034.n010Y3AT016917-at-ns.microscopy.com} 8, 26 -- References: {200901010034.n010Y3AT016917-at-ns.microscopy.com} 8, 26 -- Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 11:12:17 -0500 8, 26 -- To: Microscopy-at-microscopy.com 8, 26 -- From: Philip Oshel {oshel1pe-at-cmich.edu} 8, 26 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] Developing EM class for undergrads + going 8, 26 -- digital advice? 8, 26 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" 8, 26 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Jan 2009 16:12:19.0226 (UTC) FILETIME=[6231AFA0:01C96F50] 8, 26 -- X-Canit-CHI2: 0.00 8, 26 -- X-Bayes-Prob: 0.0001 (Score -0.5, tokens from: -at--at-RPTN, default) 8, 26 -- X-Spam-Score: -4.20 () [Hold at 5.00] L_EXCH_MF,L_USD,RDNS_NONE,Bayes(0.0001,-0.5) 8, 26 -- X-CanItPRO-Stream: default 8, 26 -- X-Canit-Stats-ID: 7064876 - 02ca6d00f197 8, 26 -- X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . roaringpenguin . com) on 141.209.20.25 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
We are doing BiFC to study interaction of two nucleoporins in vivo first and then at the em level using immunogold labeling. Does anyone know, if there is a GFP antibody available that would only recognize the two halves when assembled? Thanks for your help.
Tea -- *************************************** Tea Meulia, PhD Research Scientists and Director Molecular and Cellular Imaging Center Ohio State University/OARDC 1680 Madison Ave. Wooster OH 44691
tel.: 330-263-3836 or -3828 fax: 330-202-3563
http://www.oardc.ohio-state.edu/mcic
*****************************************
==============================Original Headers============================== 5, 21 -- From meulia.1-at-osu.edu Tue Jan 6 09:54:23 2009 5, 21 -- Received: from defang19.it.ohio-state.edu (defang19.it.ohio-state.edu [128.146.216.133]) 5, 21 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n06FsNR8008224 5, 21 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Tue, 6 Jan 2009 09:54:23 -0600 5, 21 -- Received: from defang9.it.ohio-state.edu (defang9.it.ohio-state.edu [128.146.216.78]) 5, 21 -- by defang19.it.ohio-state.edu (8.13.7/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n06FsMaT007775 5, 21 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Tue, 6 Jan 2009 10:54:22 -0500 5, 21 -- Received: from [140.254.186.120] (dhcp-140-254-186-120.osuwireless.ohio-state.edu [140.254.186.120]) 5, 21 -- by defang9.it.ohio-state.edu (8.13.7/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n06FsM4c027286 5, 21 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Tue, 6 Jan 2009 10:54:22 -0500 5, 21 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 5, 21 -- Message-Id: {p06240807c5892d4e19f3-at-[140.254.186.120]} 5, 21 -- Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2009 10:57:16 -0500 5, 21 -- To: Microscopy Listserver {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 5, 21 -- From: Tea Meulia {meulia.1-at-osu.edu} 5, 21 -- Subject: antibodies for BiFC 5, 21 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" 5, 21 -- X-Spam-Score: 0.00 () [Tag at 4.50] 5, 21 -- X-CanItPRO-Stream: outbound 5, 21 -- X-Canit-Stats-ID: Bayes signature not available 5, 21 -- X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . roaringpenguin . com) on 128.146.216.133 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
We have just received this message from Ash Prabala, President and CEO of DVC company:
"It is with profound regret that I inform you that Doug Benson, a dear friend and colleague, passed away early this morning at the age of 56. It is very difficult to find a silver lining in this news, but given the tough odds that he faced, at least he was spared a prolonged battle with cancer. Also, several generations of his family were close by and I know that he was greatly comforted by their proximity, and by their warmth and love.
Prior to his pivotal role as Chief Scientist and Director at DVC, Doug was the founder of Inovision Corporation - a highly regarded industry leader in the development of image analysis software. Before that, he was a National Cancer Institute Fellow at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas. Douglas obtained a Ph.D. in Biochemistry from North Carolina State University.
I know that there are many in the Life Sciences, Microscopy & Imaging communities who knew Doug well, either personally or through his academic, research and/or business affiliations. Please keep Doug, his wife Louise, and their family members in your thoughts. I feel a deep sense of personal loss and sorrow, but will always remember Doug as a warm, generous, funny, brilliant, caring friend and colleague. I will miss his sense of humor and the twinkle in his eyes when he would recount a joke or a personal anecdote.
Rest In Peace, Doug. You will be missed by all those who had the privilege of knowing you."
We have just received this message from Ash Prabala, President and CEO of DVC company:
"It is with profound regret that I inform you that Doug Benson, a dear friend and colleague, passed away early this morning at the age of 56. It is very difficult to find a silver lining in this news, but given the tough odds that he faced, at least he was spared a prolonged battle with cancer. Also, several generations of his family were close by and I know that he was greatly comforted by their proximity, and by their warmth and love.
Prior to his pivotal role as Chief Scientist and Director at DVC, Doug was the founder of Inovision Corporation - a highly regarded industry leader in the development of image analysis software. Before that, he was a National Cancer Institute Fellow at the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas. Douglas obtained a Ph.D. in Biochemistry from North Carolina State University.
I know that there are many in the Life Sciences, Microscopy & Imaging communities who knew Doug well, either personally or through his academic, research and/or business affiliations. Please keep Doug, his wife Louise, and their family members in your thoughts. I feel a deep sense of personal loss and sorrow, but will always remember Doug as a warm, generous, funny, brilliant, caring friend and colleague. I will miss his sense of humor and the twinkle in his eyes when he would recount a joke or a personal anecdote.
Rest In Peace, Doug. You will be missed by all those who had the privilege of knowing you."
NOTE: DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL. SEE BELOW FOR APPLICATION INFORMATION.
Electron Microscopy Position Available Official Title: Molecular Technologist II, III, or IV--depending on qualifications and work experience
Location: Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC
Requirements: Training and experience in running and maintaining electron microscopes, proficiency in cutting ultrathin sections and performing negative staining. Knowledge of scientific laboratory operation (making solutions, ordering, typing results, keeping records, etc.). Clinical laboratory and research experience are a plus.
Laboratory description: The work force consists of the director and 6 EM technologists who perform pathology (~500 samples/year), virology (~1000 samples/year), and research work; 3 TEMs; 1 SEM; 7 ultramicrotomes?2 with cryo attachments; plus ancillary specimen preparation equipment.
Job descriptions available at: https://www.hr.duke.edu/ Click ?Jobs? Under ?Job Descriptions? click ?Duke University Health System? Under ?Browse by Job Title? click ?M? At the bottom click ?Molecular Tech II, III, or IV? (Alternatively, to get to here, copy and paste: https://www.hr.duke.edu/jobs/descr_duhs/job_title.php?ID=M
These descriptions are generic, and not all jobs described within (e.g., histology) are required of the EM position.
EM Laboratory web site: http://pathology.mc.duke.edu/website/WebForm.aspx?id=ElectronMicroMain
Send resume to: Sara E. Miller, Ph. D. Professor, Department of Pathology Director, Electron Microscopy Laboratory P. O. Box 3712 Duke University Medical Center Durham, NC 27710
A relatively new person in our EHS dept has informed us that UA is a strong gamma emitter and should be stored and disposed of in a stainless steel containersAND used in a stainless steel hood (or with other proper protection measures). This was a surprise to us as all former EHS staff have told us that though it DOES need to be disposed of with other radioactive waste, it can be used in a normal hood. We obviously want to be as safe as possible.
Can you advise on any special handling procedures used for UA?
Many thanks in advance!
danielle
Buck Institute for Age Research
==============================Original Headers============================== 3, 22 -- From dcrippen-at-buckinstitute.org Wed Jan 7 15:31:35 2009 3, 22 -- Received: from inverness.buckcenter.org (webmail.buckinstitute.org [64.84.58.24]) 3, 22 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n07LVZR8002117 3, 22 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Wed, 7 Jan 2009 15:31:35 -0600 3, 22 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 3, 22 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message 3, 22 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 3, 22 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 3, 22 -- charset="US-ASCII" 3, 22 -- Subject: RE: Uranyl Acetate handling, storage, and disposal 3, 22 -- Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 13:31:34 -0800 3, 22 -- Message-ID: {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD61-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} 3, 22 -- In-Reply-To: {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD60-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} 3, 22 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: 3, 22 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 3, 22 -- Thread-Topic: Uranyl Acetate handling, storage, and disposal 3, 22 -- Thread-Index: AclxDrE0qGF/HDu+TY2cyGuAAHfcOgAABlUgAAAIS2AAABVbgA== 3, 22 -- References: {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD5E-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD5F-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD60-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} 3, 22 -- From: "Danielle Crippen" {dcrippen-at-buckinstitute.org} 3, 22 -- To: {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} 3, 22 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 3, 22 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n07LVZR8002117 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
I'm curious - has this new EHS person done actual measurements (comparing distance from source, shielding, etc.) on the UA that is commonly used in EM labs, or are they assuming that you have undepleted UA? Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thought the UA we buy from the EM supply companies is not as radioactive as "plain" UA. I know I've tried to get counts off of it (with a gamma detector) & it isn't very hot.
Tamara
On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 15:32:23 -0600 dcrippen-at-buckinstitute.org wrote: } } } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy } Society of America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } Dear List, } } A relatively new person in our EHS dept has informed us } that UA is a } strong gamma emitter and should be stored and disposed } of in a stainless } steel containersAND used in a stainless steel hood (or } with other proper } protection measures). This was a surprise to us as all } former EHS staff } have told us that though it DOES need to be disposed of } with other } radioactive waste, it can be used in a normal hood. We } obviously want } to be as safe as possible. } } Can you advise on any special handling procedures used } for UA? } } Many thanks in advance! } } danielle } } Buck Institute for Age Research } } } } ==============================Original } Headers============================== } 3, 22 -- From dcrippen-at-buckinstitute.org Wed Jan 7 } 15:31:35 2009 } 3, 22 -- Received: from inverness.buckcenter.org } (webmail.buckinstitute.org [64.84.58.24]) } 3, 22 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) } with ESMTP id n07LVZR8002117 } 3, 22 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Wed, 7 Jan } 2009 15:31:35 -0600 } 3, 22 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 } 3, 22 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message } 3, 22 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 } 3, 22 -- Content-Type: text/plain; } 3, 22 -- charset="US-ASCII" } 3, 22 -- Subject: RE: Uranyl Acetate handling, storage, } and disposal } 3, 22 -- Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 13:31:34 -0800 } 3, 22 -- Message-ID: } {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD61-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} } 3, 22 -- In-Reply-To: } {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD60-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} } 3, 22 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: } 3, 22 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: } 3, 22 -- Thread-Topic: Uranyl Acetate handling, storage, } and disposal } 3, 22 -- Thread-Index: } AclxDrE0qGF/HDu+TY2cyGuAAHfcOgAABlUgAAAIS2AAABVbgA== } 3, 22 -- References: } {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD5E-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} } {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD5F-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} } {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD60-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} } 3, 22 -- From: "Danielle Crippen" } {dcrippen-at-buckinstitute.org} } 3, 22 -- To: {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} } 3, 22 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit } 3, 22 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to } 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n07LVZR8002117 } ==============================End of - } Headers==============================
This Question/Comment was submitted to the Microscopy Listserver using the WWW based Form at http://microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/MLFormMail.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember this posting is most likely not from a Subscriber, so when replying please copy both reganhll-at-gmail.com as well as the MIcroscopy Listserver ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: reganhll-at-gmail.com Name: JOhnson
Organization: URI
Title-Subject: [Filtered] EM TOMOGRAPHY
Question: I am looking for a book on basics of EM tomograpyh. Though i am into EM since last 5yrs ...Need to know about EM tomography.
This Question/Comment was submitted to the Microscopy Listserver using the WWW based Form at http://microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/MLFormMail.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember this posting is most likely not from a Subscriber, so when replying please copy both abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com as well as the MIcroscopy Listserver ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com Name: Alex Besenyo PhD
Organization: President
Title-Subject: [Filtered] Uranyl Acetate a Alpha Emitter
Question: There is a posting that needs clarification.
As the sole world wide manufacturer of Uranyl Acetate and other uranium compounds let me assure everyone that Uranyl Acetate is a alpha emitter and not a gamma emmiter.
As for storage good house keeping rules apply.
If any one has any direct questions regarding this they can post or contact me directly.
I worked with Uranium at ICN Pharmaceuticals and Isotope Products Labs making standards. Uranium is an alpha emitter, which is far more deadly internally. Also, Uranium is chemically toxic. So, keep it safe.
I doubt you'll find much dose coming off a small vial of U salt. Secondary x-rays may be produced from the alpha-particles fluorescing the surrounding matrix. Minimal shielding should suffice.
Don Kloos VP Sales, Marketing, Business Development Parallax Research, Inc.
-----Original Message----- X-from: dcrippen-at-buckinstitute.org [mailto:dcrippen-at-buckinstitute.org] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 1:37 PM To: dkloos-at-parallaxray.com
Dear List,
A relatively new person in our EHS dept has informed us that UA is a strong gamma emitter and should be stored and disposed of in a stainless steel containersAND used in a stainless steel hood (or with other proper protection measures). This was a surprise to us as all former EHS staff have told us that though it DOES need to be disposed of with other radioactive waste, it can be used in a normal hood. We obviously want to be as safe as possible.
Can you advise on any special handling procedures used for UA?
Many thanks in advance!
danielle
Buck Institute for Age Research
==============================Original Headers============================== 3, 22 -- From dcrippen-at-buckinstitute.org Wed Jan 7 15:31:35 2009 3, 22 -- Received: from inverness.buckcenter.org (webmail.buckinstitute.org [64.84.58.24]) 3, 22 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n07LVZR8002117 3, 22 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Wed, 7 Jan 2009 15:31:35 -0600 3, 22 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 3, 22 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message 3, 22 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 3, 22 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 3, 22 -- charset="US-ASCII" 3, 22 -- Subject: RE: Uranyl Acetate handling, storage, and disposal 3, 22 -- Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 13:31:34 -0800 3, 22 -- Message-ID: {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD61-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} 3, 22 -- In-Reply-To: {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD60-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} 3, 22 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: 3, 22 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 3, 22 -- Thread-Topic: Uranyl Acetate handling, storage, and disposal 3, 22 -- Thread-Index: AclxDrE0qGF/HDu+TY2cyGuAAHfcOgAABlUgAAAIS2AAABVbgA== 3, 22 -- References: {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD5E-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD5F-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD60-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} 3, 22 -- From: "Danielle Crippen" {dcrippen-at-buckinstitute.org} 3, 22 -- To: {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} 3, 22 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 3, 22 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n07LVZR8002117 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 14, 30 -- From dkloos-at-parallaxray.com Wed Jan 7 17:51:53 2009 14, 30 -- Received: from cp18.heritagewebdesign.com (cp18.heritagewebdesign.com [209.90.77.54]) 14, 30 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n07Nprki026992 14, 30 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Wed, 7 Jan 2009 17:51:53 -0600 14, 30 -- Received: from user-0c8gg59.cable.mindspring.com ([24.136.64.169] helo=donl) 14, 30 -- by cp18.heritagewebdesign.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) 14, 30 -- (envelope-from {dkloos-at-parallaxray.com} ) 14, 30 -- id 1LKiBm-0000gH-5m; Wed, 07 Jan 2009 16:51:54 -0700 14, 30 -- Reply-To: {dkloos-at-parallaxray.com} 14, 30 -- From: "Don Kloos" {dkloos-at-parallaxray.com} 14, 30 -- To: {dcrippen-at-buckinstitute.org} 14, 30 -- Cc: {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 14, 30 -- References: {200901072136.n07Laq35015255-at-ns.microscopy.com} 14, 30 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] RE: Uranyl Acetate handling, storage, and disposal 14, 30 -- Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 15:51:48 -0800 14, 30 -- Organization: Parallax Research 14, 30 -- Message-ID: {6735FBA29934490C8F3B6EB1137FF376-at-donl} 14, 30 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 14, 30 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 14, 30 -- charset="us-ascii" 14, 30 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 14, 30 -- X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 14, 30 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 14, 30 -- In-Reply-To: {200901072136.n07Laq35015255-at-ns.microscopy.com} 14, 30 -- thread-index: AclxEA7jOgj41WzYT5aTp4V8xWeubQAEkOvQ 14, 30 -- X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report 14, 30 -- X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cp18.heritagewebdesign.com 14, 30 -- X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - microscopy.com 14, 30 -- X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [26 6] / [26 6] 14, 30 -- X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - parallaxray.com ==============================End of - Headers==============================
Dear Listers, Today we have encountered what appears to be defective Kodak SO-163 electron image film, 3 1/4 x 4 inch, catalog #8010100. Those of you who use this film will know that when loading the film into cassettes, if the notch in the film is at the upper right-hand corner, then the emulsion side of the film is up. The suspected defective film has the emulsion side down with the notch at the upper right.
In addition, normally these packets of film have a slight upward curl (concave) with the emulsion side up and notch to the upper right. This potentially defective film has a downward curl (convex) with the notch to the upper right.
On the box of film which is a multipak of 250 sheets, the following numbers are found on the label:
Emul No. 239 002 07 2010-08 00277396
We do not know how widespread this problem is but we recommend not to use film of this lot number until more information from Kodak is available.
Mr. Donald Gantz Research Histologist/Electron Microscopist Dept. Physiology and Biophysics Center for Advanced Biomedical Research Boston University School of Medicine 700 Albany Street Boston, MA 02118 email: gantz-at-bu.edu phone: 617-638-4017
==============================Original Headers============================== 7, 25 -- From gantz-at-bu.edu Wed Jan 7 18:10:14 2009 7, 25 -- Received: from relay15.bu.edu (relay15.bu.edu [128.197.27.66]) 7, 25 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n080AECu008276 7, 25 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Wed, 7 Jan 2009 18:10:14 -0600 7, 25 -- X-Envelope-From: gantz-at-bu.edu 7, 25 -- Received: from biophysics1.bumc.bu.edu (biophysics1.bumc.bu.edu [155.41.208.134]) 7, 25 -- by relay15.bu.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n0809mVA013635; 7, 25 -- Wed, 7 Jan 2009 19:09:48 -0500 7, 25 -- Received: from gantz (cabr3-dhcp-208-153.bumc.bu.edu [155.41.208.153]) 7, 25 -- by biophysics1.bumc.bu.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id n0809mF4015021; 7, 25 -- Wed, 7 Jan 2009 19:09:48 -0500 7, 25 -- Message-ID: {000b01c97125$69b0c190$99d0299b-at-gantz} 7, 25 -- From: "Don Gantz" {gantz-at-bu.edu} 7, 25 -- To: {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 7, 25 -- Cc: {bullitt-at-bu.edu} 7, 25 -- Subject: Defective Electron Image Film 7, 25 -- Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 19:09:45 -0500 7, 25 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 7, 25 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 7, 25 -- charset="iso-8859-1" 7, 25 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 7, 25 -- X-Priority: 3 7, 25 -- X-MSMail-Priority: Normal 7, 25 -- X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 7, 25 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
Uranium is a natural radioactive element which is "mainly" alpha emitter. Uranium isotopes also have a very small probablity of "spontaneous fission", as well (this is not the main concern here of course).
Since, the decay product of Uranium is also radioactive, you will need to follow the decay tree to get a better feeling of what kinds of other elements/particles might be present in Uranyl Acetate.
You may be able to construct the decay tree using the information from
http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html
It will be a tedious calculation to assess the health risk from handling Uranyl Acetate. It is always best to opt on the side of more shielding. Go with ALARA (As Low As Reasonably Achievable) principles.
Hope this helps, Ayten.
-- =========================== Ayten Celik-Aktas, PhD Ankara University Electron Microscopy Laboratory Ankara, Turkey ===========================
On Wed, Jan 7, 2009 at 11:36 PM, {dcrippen-at-buckinstitute.org} wrote: } } } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } Dear List, } } A relatively new person in our EHS dept has informed us that UA is a } strong gamma emitter and should be stored and disposed of in a stainless } steel containersAND used in a stainless steel hood (or with other proper } protection measures). This was a surprise to us as all former EHS staff } have told us that though it DOES need to be disposed of with other } radioactive waste, it can be used in a normal hood. We obviously want } to be as safe as possible. } } Can you advise on any special handling procedures used for UA? } } Many thanks in advance! } } danielle } } Buck Institute for Age Research } } } } ==============================Original Headers============================== } 3, 22 -- From dcrippen-at-buckinstitute.org Wed Jan 7 15:31:35 2009 } 3, 22 -- Received: from inverness.buckcenter.org (webmail.buckinstitute.org [64.84.58.24]) } 3, 22 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n07LVZR8002117 } 3, 22 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Wed, 7 Jan 2009 15:31:35 -0600 } 3, 22 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 } 3, 22 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message } 3, 22 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 } 3, 22 -- Content-Type: text/plain; } 3, 22 -- charset="US-ASCII" } 3, 22 -- Subject: RE: Uranyl Acetate handling, storage, and disposal } 3, 22 -- Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 13:31:34 -0800 } 3, 22 -- Message-ID: {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD61-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} } 3, 22 -- In-Reply-To: {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD60-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} } 3, 22 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: } 3, 22 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: } 3, 22 -- Thread-Topic: Uranyl Acetate handling, storage, and disposal } 3, 22 -- Thread-Index: AclxDrE0qGF/HDu+TY2cyGuAAHfcOgAABlUgAAAIS2AAABVbgA== } 3, 22 -- References: {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD5E-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD5F-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} {69142A827D247F45877B305E991DB61F18DD60-at-inverness.buckcenter.org} } 3, 22 -- From: "Danielle Crippen" {dcrippen-at-buckinstitute.org} } 3, 22 -- To: {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} } 3, 22 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit } 3, 22 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n07LVZR8002117 } ==============================End of - Headers============================== }
I've included a group of emails (not all) from September, 1998 on this same discussion. We did measure beta and gamma emissions greater than background levels from the uranyl acetate stock reagent bottles, not from solutions.
It's still wise to use proper PPE methods especially when weighing and preparing solutions. Store the reagent bottles inside/behind shielding in a relatively secluded area and treat old solutions as heavy metal waste. Don't pour down sinks!
Bruce F. Ingber USDA-ARS, SRRC Biologist/Electron Microscopy 1100 Robert E. Lee Blvd. New Orleans, LA 70124 Bruce.Ingber-at-ars.usda.gov
ph. 504-286-4270 fax 504-286-4217 cel 504-782-6323
-----Original Message----- X-from: thoward-at-unm.edu [mailto:thoward-at-unm.edu] Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2009 5:21 PM To: Ingber, Bruce
I'm curious - has this new EHS person done actual measurements (comparing distance from source, shielding, etc.) on the UA that is commonly used in EM labs, or are they assuming that you have undepleted UA? Maybe I'm mistaken, but I thought the UA we buy from the EM supply companies is not as radioactive as "plain" UA. I know I've tried to get counts off of it (with a gamma detector) & it isn't very hot.
Tamara
On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 15:32:23 -0600 dcrippen-at-buckinstitute.org wrote: } } ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy } Society of America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- } } Dear List, } } A relatively new person in our EHS dept has informed us } that UA is a } strong gamma emitter and should be stored and disposed } of in a stainless } steel containersAND used in a stainless steel hood (or } with other proper } protection measures). This was a surprise to us as all } former EHS staff } have told us that though it DOES need to be disposed of } with other } radioactive waste, it can be used in a normal hood. We } obviously want } to be as safe as possible. } } Can you advise on any special handling procedures used } for UA? } } Many thanks in advance! } } danielle } } Buck Institute for Age Research -----Original Message----- X-from: Warren E Straszheim [mailto:bingber.BAYOU.SRRCDOM] Sent: Wednesday, September 23, 1998 4:13 PM To: bingber.BAYOU.SRRCDOM
FWIW
Some years ago I heard an account of a radiation safety inspection as part of a larger safety review at a large lab. The lab was involved in coal research, as were we, and had a fair amount of coal samples stored in glass jars. An inspection team came thru and happened to check the jars for radiation, found some, and instructed the researchers that they would need to start following radiation safety procedures.
Now coal can contain minute amounts of uranium in its mineral matter, but not enough that should set off a detector. Besides the detectors were setup to measure alpha particles, and there was no way that alpha particles emitted from the contents of a glass jar should be detected on the outside.
A little digging revealed that there was in fact a little radiation present, but it was a slight residue left on the jar surface after washing. Apparently the jars went through the same washer as did other jars which had held radioactive materials. I think the radiation safety folks may have received additional training after the incident.
} Anyway, while gathering all uranium compounds, our radiation safety officer checked the compounds using a dosimeter that recorded alpha, beta, and gamma radiation. Levels of radiation were found that were just below OSHA guidelines for maximum daily exposure when the powder was checked from several inches away from the dosimeter. Thus, we decided to store the compounds in an acrylic box behind a beta shield in an isolated location. Whenever the actual Uranyl acetate is weighed to prepare dilute solutions proper safety precautions are recommended, i.e. use a beta shield, wear gloves and dust mask, weigh in a low occupancy room, etc. } } We repeated our dosimeter readings last month with two different alpha, beta, and gamma dosimeters taking readings several feet from the bottles, removing the two acrylic shields one by one, and then with the cover of the UAc exposed (always moving closer to the chemical source). I won't enter the millirem/rad discussion; suffice to say it's an interesting little experiment for your support staff especially with the dosimeters left on audio signal.
{snip}
---------------------------------------------------- Warren E. Straszheim 23 Town Engineering Iowa State University Ames IA, 50011-3232
electron microscopy, x-ray analysis, image analysis, computer applications
-----Original Message----- X-from: "Woody.N.White-at-mcdermott.com"-at-Sparc5.Microscopy.Com [mailto:bingber.BAYOU.SRRCDOM] Sent: Thursday, September 17, 1998 9:28 PM To: bingber.BAYOU.SRRCDOM
This bounced once, I shall try again... (Nestor ignore the (not spam) email if this makes it to the listserver ok) ----------------------------------------------------------------
Well....
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission limits of skin & extremity (hands, feet) is 50 Rem per year. ...Not something to "shoot" for,
since the dose is also limited to "As Low As Reasonably Achievable".
The (damage) conversion coefficient from mR from this source (no alpha if not ingested) to mRem is ~1. 50 Rem = 50,000 mRem. At a
dose rate of 0.6 mR/hr, one would have to hold the container for many years to receive a one year maximum dose (50,000 / 0.6 per hr = max hours exposure). At 5 mR/hr, it would be 50,000 / 5. At that
one would have to hold the container for 10,000 hours before exceeding NRC dose limits. Exposure will also decrease as a function of the square of the distance from the source.
For medical tests to discover any changes in body chemistry, it would take about 50 Rem acute whole body exposure.
Less dose is always better, but in realistic terms the dose from the UA should not be of any concern. If this level is of concern, do not fly in airplanes, live at high elevations, avoid all medical
radiation, avoid certain beaches, beware of granite buildings, run from radium dial watches, etc. :)
The real danger is if the UA enters the body where the alpha source
is in direct contact with livings tissue. Radiological bio-assay (urine/fecal) would be required to detect this.
Woody White McDermott Technology
-----Original Message----- X-from: William Tivol [mailto:bingber.BAYOU.SRRCDOM] Sent: Thursday, September 17, 1998 9:58 PM To: bingber.BAYOU.SRRCDOM
Dear David,
} Using Bill's number's, you would } still be well under the limits for occupational exposure if you were in } constant contact with .6 millirem/hr for a 2000 hr work year, (correct me, } but my references place the limits at 1.25 rem/quarter, 5 rem/year whole } body
These limits are for radiation workers. Because we get paid, we can be exposed to a greater risk. The limit for the general population is 0.5 rem/year whole body, and I think this limit also applies to women who are or may be pregnant. I do not know the status of graduate students; I'd be inclined to err on the side of caution--especially since it is fairly easy to keep exposure to UA low. Yours, Bill Tivol -----Original Message----- X-from: David Bentley [mailto:bingber.BAYOU.SRRCDOM] Sent: Thursday, September 17, 1998 8:09 PM To: bingber.BAYOU.SRRCDOM
Responding with tidbits regarding this thread.
We make up a saturated stock bottle which we draw from, and replenish with UA and water (8-10g UA/100 ml) from time to time. The insoluble material is described in the Merck Index as being due to insoluble basic salts. It describes Uranyl Acetate as being "freely soluble in water acidulated with acetic acid" For years, we have followed a modification of a procedure from Millonig's 1976 book Laboratory Manual of Biological Electron Microscopy (pg 53) and added a few drops of acetic acid per 100mls of stock saturated UA (stored in a brown bottle). This seems to push the ppt reaction the other way and give a clear solution. There seems to be little difference in staining as long as only a few drops of acetic acid are used. Changing the pH of the stain by much, is risky though as there are numerous papers and procedures which modify the effects of UA stain by doing so. We have raised the pH to the 4.5-5.5 (any higher and the UA will ppt) and gotten improved staining but with unacceptable amounts of ppt on the sections.
When compared with the other chemicals in the EM lab, UA would seem to be relatively safe when used carefully. Ingestion and inhalation (exposure to dust) are our major concern due to heavy metal toxicity as well as the radiation hazards. Making sure that surfaces are not contaminated, and cleaning any spillage immediately from bottles and tables before it dries are important steps. Wearing gloves, and hand washing after glove removal are also important safeguards.
The radiation exposure hazard under most operating conditions seems minimal. The least exposure possible is desirable (ALARA), when you don't need to handle it, don't be near it. Using Bill's number's, you would still be well under the limits for occupational exposure if you were in constant contact with .6 millirem/hr for a 2000 hr work year, (correct me, but my references place the limits at 1.25 rem/quarter, 5 rem/year whole body and 18.75 rem/quarter, 75 rem/year for extremities (Rayburn)) The other factor to keep in mind is that we are not talking about a whole body exposure, but just exposure to the hands. All in all, the amount of exposure while making up and staining grids seems miniscule. -----Original Message----- X-from: ROBIN CROSS [mailto:bingber.BAYOU.SRRCDOM] Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 1998 7:10 AM To: bingber.BAYOU.SRRCDOM
The concentration quoted is far higher (btw at what concentration in water does UA become a saturated solution?) than normally would be used for EM staining.
} A solution of 10g UA in 15mls H2O was measured with a Geiger counter.
I have been using UA for many years and I recall that whenever I questioned and investigated its possible radiation implications I have been assured that it is not dangerous at the concentrations and quantities we use, provided that it is not ingested. Robin H Cross Director : EM Unit, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa eurc-at-giraffe.ru.ac.za - tel: +27 46 603 8168 - fax: +27 46 622 4377 http://www.ru.ac.za/affiliates/emu/em.htm
As an aside, the pretty flowered dinnerware from the 50's, the vivid oranges and yellows are from uranium. If you have any, run a Geiger counter over them, you'll be surprised the number of counts. Also the mantles from gas and propane lanterns contain radioactive thorium. In the past health physicist have suggested using them(sealed in their bags) for check sources for counters.
Regardless, because of the toxicity, radiation hazard, as well as expenses to purchase(well over $1.00/gm) and dispose of UA, minimizing the amount needed to be discarded and wasted seems desirable. To the extents possible, use of minimal amounts, and if considerable staining is done, making stock saturated solutions which can be diluted to the desired concentration as needed, are good ways to conserve UA, minimize radiation exposure, and inhalation and ingestion hazards.
Now, if we are starting a poll for the chemicals in the EM Lab that make us the most anxious, my vote is for cacodylate. -----Original Message----- X-from: William Tivol [mailto:bingber.BAYOU.SRRCDOM] Sent: Wednesday, September 16, 1998 4:34 PM To: bingber.BAYOU.SRRCDOM
Dear Josephine, } } A solution of 10g UA in 15mls H2O was measured with a Geiger counter. } 500 } counts/sec was generated. } A supplier had measured 100g UA :- } 1 Alpha - {2 counts/sec, using a 540 scintillation meter with AP-2 Probe } 2 Beta - } 500 counts/sec, using a 540 E1 probe coupled to a GM Meter (this } determines beta events and some low energy gamma events) } 3 Gamma dose Rate (energy field) - two measurements done: } using Mini monitor type R with GM Probe - 0.6mR/hr (mainly gamma) } and Ionization chamber DMM 95/0500 - 5 mR/hr (Beta and Gamma energy } field). } 4 Specific Activity (U approx. 55%) = 1.04 x 10 { {...} } Bq { {...} } gm
} { {...} } . } I calculated approximately the expected activity from 30 g UA (about 0.1 mole, or 6*10^22 atoms). T_1/2 is 4.4*10^9 y and there are 3.1*10^7 s/y, so the decay rate is 5*10^-18 s^-1, and the activity is 3*10^5 Bq. The build-up of daughter products with shorter half-lives will reach steady state at which point the activities of the daughters will be the same as that of the parent. Pa 234 has a gamma transition, and there are several betas in the chain. The longer-lived isotopes in the chain have lives of 10^4 to 10^5 y, and these will not be at steady state (unless your UA is *very* old ;-) ). 0.6 mR/hr is a significant amount of exposure, and, if one were to hold the jars for some minutes, a sizable fraction of the allowed annual dose would be attained.
} Can UA be used openly without protection in laboratory? } Small amounts can be used, but be sure to wash hands before eating. One area of the lab should be used for UA. A quiet area with little traffic is best. UA, while not nearly the most dangerous EM reagent, should still be treated with respect. Yours, Bill Tivol
==============================Original Headers============================== 63, 31 -- From Bruce.Ingber-at-ARS.USDA.GOV Thu Jan 8 09:50:59 2009 63, 31 -- Received: from messagescreen3.ars.usda.gov (messagescreen3.ars.usda.gov [199.133.180.150]) 63, 31 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n08FowRF024837 63, 31 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:50:58 -0600 63, 31 -- Received: from CO-MAILBH-02.ARSNET.ARS.USDA.GOV (ars.usda.gov [199.133.183.227] (may be forged)) 63, 31 -- by messagescreen3.ars.usda.gov (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n08FobJw024001 63, 31 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 09:50:58 -0600 63, 31 -- Received: from CO-MAIL-03.ARSNET.ARS.USDA.GOV ([10.100.2.202]) by CO-MAILBH-02.ARSNET.ARS.USDA.GOV with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); 63, 31 -- Thu, 8 Jan 2009 08:48:55 -0700 63, 31 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 63, 31 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message 63, 31 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 63, 31 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 63, 31 -- charset="us-ascii" 63, 31 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] Uranyl Acetate handling, storage, and 63, 31 -- Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 08:48:55 -0700 63, 31 -- Message-ID: {8017F94146BF634DA9414E4B9088525B03E8D4D4-at-CO-MAIL-03.ARSNET.ARS.USDA.GOV} 63, 31 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: 63, 31 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 63, 31 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] Uranyl Acetate handling, storage, and 63, 31 -- Thread-Index: AclxHrQEWtl0gXUIQCyvDFYeWl60ygAg4LogAAGC4gA= 63, 31 -- References: {200901072321.n07NLLKA030038-at-ns.microscopy.com} 63, 31 -- From: "Ingber, Bruce" {Bruce.Ingber-at-ARS.USDA.GOV} 63, 31 -- To: {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 63, 31 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 Jan 2009 15:48:55.0477 (UTC) FILETIME=[9CBBD650:01C971A8] 63, 31 -- X-MessageScreenMessageID: 1231429858.626943.1253.994197512 63, 31 -- X-MessageScreenContentScore: Score of 5 assigned to Content 63, 31 -- X-MessageScreenUCEScore: Score of 0 assigned to UCE 63, 31 -- X-MessageScreen: Analyzed by IntelliReach MessageScreen(tm) 63, 31 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 63, 31 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n08FowRF024837 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
Dear Mr. Gantz, I have received boxes of Kodak 4489 film in the past that were marked wrong. It is obvious in the darkroom when you are loading the film in the holders that the emulsion was on the wrong side (or, alternatively, that they put the notch in the wrong place). The emulsion is the brighter side, the back is the dark side. This happened with two or three boxes, several years ago, and I informed the Kodak company with their reply card that comes with the film. I received no reply. I used the film, with the emulsion side up, as usual and it was just fine. The emulsion makes the plastic curl slightly towards it, but it usually flattens out after processing. I don't think the film is faulty, just marked wrong. Maybe test a few sheets first, then use as usual. Regards,
-----Original Message----- X-from: gantz-at-bu.edu [mailto:gantz-at-bu.edu] Sent: January 7, 2009 4:14 PM To: maryflet-at-interchange.ubc.ca
Dear Listers, Today we have encountered what appears to be defective Kodak SO-163 electron image film, 3 1/4 x 4 inch, catalog #8010100. Those of you who use this film will know that when loading the film into cassettes, if the notch in the film is at the upper right-hand corner, then the emulsion side of the film is up. The suspected defective film has the emulsion side down with the notch at the upper right.
In addition, normally these packets of film have a slight upward curl (concave) with the emulsion side up and notch to the upper right. This potentially defective film has a downward curl (convex) with the notch to the upper right.
On the box of film which is a multipak of 250 sheets, the following numbers are found on the label:
Emul No. 239 002 07 2010-08 00277396
We do not know how widespread this problem is but we recommend not to use film of this lot number until more information from Kodak is available.
Mr. Donald Gantz Research Histologist/Electron Microscopist Dept. Physiology and Biophysics Center for Advanced Biomedical Research Boston University School of Medicine 700 Albany Street Boston, MA 02118 email: gantz-at-bu.edu phone: 617-638-4017
==============================Original Headers============================== 7, 25 -- From gantz-at-bu.edu Wed Jan 7 18:10:14 2009 7, 25 -- Received: from relay15.bu.edu (relay15.bu.edu [128.197.27.66]) 7, 25 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n080AECu008276 7, 25 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Wed, 7 Jan 2009 18:10:14 -0600 7, 25 -- X-Envelope-From: gantz-at-bu.edu 7, 25 -- Received: from biophysics1.bumc.bu.edu (biophysics1.bumc.bu.edu [155.41.208.134]) 7, 25 -- by relay15.bu.edu (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n0809mVA013635; 7, 25 -- Wed, 7 Jan 2009 19:09:48 -0500 7, 25 -- Received: from gantz (cabr3-dhcp-208-153.bumc.bu.edu [155.41.208.153]) 7, 25 -- by biophysics1.bumc.bu.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id n0809mF4015021; 7, 25 -- Wed, 7 Jan 2009 19:09:48 -0500 7, 25 -- Message-ID: {000b01c97125$69b0c190$99d0299b-at-gantz} 7, 25 -- From: "Don Gantz" {gantz-at-bu.edu} 7, 25 -- To: {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 7, 25 -- Cc: {bullitt-at-bu.edu} 7, 25 -- Subject: Defective Electron Image Film 7, 25 -- Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 19:09:45 -0500 7, 25 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 7, 25 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 7, 25 -- charset="iso-8859-1" 7, 25 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 7, 25 -- X-Priority: 3 7, 25 -- X-MSMail-Priority: Normal 7, 25 -- X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1807 7, 25 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1807 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 16, 32 -- From maryflet-at-interchange.ubc.ca Thu Jan 8 12:41:25 2009 16, 32 -- Received: from mr4.mail-relay.ubc.ca (mr4.mail-relay.ubc.ca [137.82.45.7]) 16, 32 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n08IfOq3010949 16, 32 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:41:25 -0600 16, 32 -- Received: from mta2.interchange.ubc.ca (mta2.interchange.ubc.ca [142.103.145.70]) 16, 32 -- by mr4.mail-relay.ubc.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6A591B276 16, 32 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 10:41:23 -0800 (PST) 16, 32 -- Received: from Mary (desk.staff.mmat.ubc.ca [137.82.16.178]) 16, 32 -- by smtp.interchange.ubc.ca 16, 32 -- (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.21 (built Sep 8 2003)) 16, 32 -- with ESMTP id {0KD60098018Y29-at-smtp.interchange.ubc.ca} for 16, 32 -- microscopy-at-microscopy.com; Thu, 08 Jan 2009 10:41:23 -0800 (PST) 16, 32 -- Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2009 10:40:41 -0800 16, 32 -- From: Mary Fletcher {maryflet-at-interchange.ubc.ca} 16, 32 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] Defective Electron Image Film 16, 32 -- In-reply-to: {200901080013.n080DvWV017600-at-ns.microscopy.com} 16, 32 -- To: gantz-at-bu.edu 16, 32 -- Cc: microscopy-at-microscopy.com 16, 32 -- Reply-to: maryflet-at-interchange.ubc.ca 16, 32 -- Message-id: {0KD60098118Y29-at-smtp.interchange.ubc.ca} 16, 32 -- Organization: Materials Eng. 16, 32 -- MIME-version: 1.0 16, 32 -- X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 16, 32 -- X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 16, 32 -- Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 16, 32 -- Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit 16, 32 -- Thread-index: AclxJgCge6cB0wedSUSS/HPlI4ibvQAlN+xg 16, 32 -- X-UBC-Scanned: Sophos PureMessage 5.4.6.353000, Antispam-Engine: 2.6.1.350677, Antispam-Data: 2009.1.8.182828 16, 32 -- X-UBC-Relayed: Relayed through mail-relay.ubc.ca 16, 32 -- X-PerlMx-Spam: Probability=8%, Report=BODY_SIZE_4000_4999 0, BODY_SIZE_5000_LESS 0, ECARD_WORD 0, __BOUNCE_CHALLENGE_SUBJ 0, __C230066_P5 0, __CP_MEDIA_BODY 0, __CP_URI_IN_BODY 0, __CT 0, __CTE 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __HAS_X_MAILER 0, __KNOWN_PHONE_RUSSIA_COUNTRY_CODE7_PREFIX8 0, __KNOWN_PHONE_RU_812 0, __MIME_TEXT_ONLY 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __OEM_PRICE 0, __SANE_MSGID 0, __STOCK_PHRASE_24 0, __STOCK_PHRASE_7 0, __USER_AGENT_MS_GENERIC 0 16, 32 -- X-Spam-Level: 16, 32 -- X-Spam-Flag: No ==============================End of - Headers==============================
We are doing a very quick survey about preferences for computer platforms used for digital imaging microscopy. There are only 4 questions (none of them nasty multi-part!) so will take less than a minute to click on your choices.
Your input will help us provide the camera systems you need to take your work to the next level, so thank you!!
http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/?p=WEB228P5UWUTCB
--David Hitrys
==============================Original Headers============================== 7, 25 -- From dhitrys-at-qimaging.com Thu Jan 8 16:44:06 2009 7, 25 -- Received: from smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net (smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net [207.172.157.102]) 7, 25 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n08Mi6XH008842 7, 25 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 16:44:06 -0600 7, 25 -- Received: from mr08.lnh.mail.rcn.net ([207.172.157.28]) 7, 25 -- by smtp02.lnh.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2009 17:44:06 -0500 7, 25 -- Received: from smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net (smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net [207.172.4.11]) 7, 25 -- by mr08.lnh.mail.rcn.net (MOS 3.10.4-GA) 7, 25 -- with ESMTP id KOD15676; 7, 25 -- Thu, 8 Jan 2009 17:43:44 -0500 (EST) 7, 25 -- Received: from 209-6-255-165.c3-0.frm-ubr2.sbo-frm.ma.cable.rcn.com (HELO DavidM1330) ([209.6.255.165]) 7, 25 -- by smtp01.lnh.mail.rcn.net with ESMTP; 08 Jan 2009 17:43:44 -0500 7, 25 -- From: "David Hitrys" {dhitrys-at-qimaging.com} 7, 25 -- To: {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 7, 25 -- Subject: PC or Mac preference for Digital Microscopy (4-question survey) 7, 25 -- Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 17:43:29 -0500 7, 25 -- Message-ID: {013401c971e2$872f6e70$958e4b50$-at-com} 7, 25 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 7, 25 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 7, 25 -- charset="iso-8859-1" 7, 25 -- X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 7, 25 -- Thread-Index: Aclx4n3tSxv5TJkiSJePgnsd+7BkFA== 7, 25 -- Content-Language: en-us 7, 25 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 7, 25 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n08Mi6XH008842 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
This Question/Comment was submitted to the Microscopy Listserver using the WWW based Form at http://microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/MLFormMail.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember this posting is most likely not from a Subscriber, so when replying please copy both abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com as well as the MIcroscopy Listserver ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com Name: Alex Besenyo PhD
Organization: ibilabs
Title-Subject: [Filtered] uranyl compounds are alpha emitters only
Question: Question:
Is it true that the stuff we use has been somehow depleted, so that it isn't as radioactive as "real" uranyl salts? Or is this yet another old wive's tale of EM?!
Reply:
When we manufacture these compounds we purchase the raw uranium in a depleted state from the government. There is no chance for error here. We do not use natural uranium.
This means that the enrichable uranium U-235 has been removed. The then U-238 which only emitts alpha radiation is procesed.
The term "depleted" means that U-235 has been removed.
If even by the slightest chance that U235 were present then every alarm would go off in our facility because Beta and Gamma radiation is detected.
I hope this answers everybodies concerns.
Our products are sold exclusively through a distributor network and all of them have been instructed on this information.
I only responded when I saw the original post and I had to respond before it got out of control.
This Question/Comment was submitted to the Microscopy Listserver using the WWW based Form at http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/MLFormMail.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember this posting is most likely not from a Subscriber, so when replying please copy both alerch-at-mcw.edu as well as the MIcroscopy Listserver ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: alerch-at-mcw.edu Name: Alexandra Lerch-Gaggl
Organization: Medical College of Wisconsin
Title-Subject: [Filtered] How to find companies that buy/salvage older equipment
Question: We have a Biorad MRC 600 confocal microscope, where we had the galvanos replaced a while ago. Now it seems that the scanner has the same problem again. Is there a way that I could find companies or institutions that salvage such equipment? Thank you.
Did you have a chance to check the information from
http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html
Let me construct the decay tree. I'm sure everybody in this list can do it but, you keep insisting that "uranyl compounds are alpha emitters only" so, I will take the time to do the job and post in to the list.
Let's start with U-238 which is the starting element in your compound.
1) U-238 decays into Th-234 by Alpha decay
2) Th-234 decays into Pa-234 by Beta decay
3) Pa-234 decays into U-234 by Beta decay
4) U-234 decays into Th-230 by Alpha decay
5) Th-230 decays into Ra-226 by Alpha decay
6) Ra-226 decays into Rn-222 by Alpha decay
7) Rn-222 decays into Po-218 by Alpha decay
8) Po-218 decays into Pb-214 by Alpha decay
9) Pb-214 decays into Bi-214 by Beta decay
10) Bi-214 decays into Po-214 by Beta decay
11) Po-214 decays into Pb-210 by Alpha decay
12) Pb-210 decays into Bi-210 by Beta decay
13) Bi-210 decays into Po-210 by Beta decay
14) Po-210 decays into Pb-206 by Alpha decay
Pb-206 is STABLE so, it is the last element to be produced as a result of U-238 radioactive decay.
I have constructed the above decay tree using the information from http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html While constructing the above decay tree I have used the branch which has the highest branch ratio (above 99% in each case).
I do not understand why you are trying to keep things "under control"?
By the way, I'm a Nuclear Engineer.
One does not even need to be nuclear engineer to understand this. Even in high school science classes people learn about radioactive decay series e.g. A decays into B and B decays into C...
Best, Ayten.
-- =========================== Ayten Celik-Aktas, PhD Ankara University Electron Microscopy Laboratory Ankara, Turkey ===========================
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:27 AM, {abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com} wrote: } } Email: abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com } Name: Alex Besenyo PhD } } Organization: ibilabs } } Title-Subject: [Filtered] uranyl compounds are alpha emitters only } } Question: Question: } } Is it true that the stuff we use has been somehow } depleted, so that it isn't as radioactive as "real" uranyl } salts? Or is this yet another old wive's tale of EM?! } } Reply: } } When we manufacture these compounds we purchase the raw uranium in a } depleted state from the government. There is no chance for error } here. We do not use natural uranium. } } This means that the enrichable uranium U-235 has been removed. } The then U-238 which only emitts alpha radiation is procesed. } } The term "depleted" means that U-235 has been removed. } } If even by the slightest chance that U235 were present then every } alarm would go off in our facility because Beta and Gamma radiation } is detected. } } I hope this answers everybodies concerns. } } Our products are sold exclusively through a distributor network and } all of them have been instructed on this information. } } I only responded when I saw the original post and I had to respond } before it got out of control. } } Sincerely } Alex Besenyo PhD } } }
Your comments are informative but, to my personal taste, definitely a bit negative in tone for this list. Your "schooling" of Alex isn't really necessary and I think we could get your information in a more positive and collegial way.
Regarding the decay tree, I note from the provided link information that the half-life of U-238 is { {4.468E+9 years} } . It has been a while since my high school chemistry but I'm wondering how much Th-234 and associated beta emission danger we are really dealing with here; seems like there must be a very small amount of Th-234 produced with such a long half-life of the original U-238. Maybe you could comment on the danger of this.
Thanks,
Dale
celikaktas-at-gmail.com wrote: } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } Dear Alex, } } Did you have a chance to check the information from } } http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html } } Let me construct the decay tree. I'm sure everybody in this list can } do it but, you keep insisting that "uranyl compounds are alpha } emitters only" so, I will take the time to do the job and post in to } the list. } } Let's start with U-238 which is the starting element in your compound. } } 1) U-238 decays into Th-234 by Alpha decay } } 2) Th-234 decays into Pa-234 by Beta decay } } 3) Pa-234 decays into U-234 by Beta decay } } 4) U-234 decays into Th-230 by Alpha decay } } 5) Th-230 decays into Ra-226 by Alpha decay } } 6) Ra-226 decays into Rn-222 by Alpha decay } } 7) Rn-222 decays into Po-218 by Alpha decay } } 8) Po-218 decays into Pb-214 by Alpha decay } } 9) Pb-214 decays into Bi-214 by Beta decay } } 10) Bi-214 decays into Po-214 by Beta decay } } 11) Po-214 decays into Pb-210 by Alpha decay } } 12) Pb-210 decays into Bi-210 by Beta decay } } 13) Bi-210 decays into Po-210 by Beta decay } } 14) Po-210 decays into Pb-206 by Alpha decay } } Pb-206 is STABLE so, it is the last element to be produced as a result } of U-238 radioactive decay. } } I have constructed the above decay tree using the information from } http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html } While constructing the above decay tree I have used the branch which } has the highest branch ratio (above 99% in each case). } } I do not understand why you are trying to keep things "under control"? } } By the way, I'm a Nuclear Engineer. } } One does not even need to be nuclear engineer to understand this. Even } in high school science classes people learn about radioactive decay } series e.g. A decays into B and B decays into C... } } Best, } Ayten. }
==============================Original Headers============================== 7, 23 -- From dac-at-research.umass.edu Fri Jan 9 08:36:22 2009 7, 23 -- Received: from race5.oit.umass.edu (race5.oit.umass.edu [128.119.101.41]) 7, 23 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09EaMPb032435 7, 23 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 08:36:22 -0600 7, 23 -- Received: from [172.30.55.164] (eutopia.bio.umass.edu [128.119.55.30]) 7, 23 -- (authenticated bits=0) 7, 23 -- by race5.oit.umass.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n09EaLpI010451 7, 23 -- (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) 7, 23 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:36:22 -0500 7, 23 -- Message-ID: {49676117.7030802-at-research.umass.edu} 7, 23 -- Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 09:37:11 -0500 7, 23 -- From: Dale Callaham {dac-at-research.umass.edu} 7, 23 -- Reply-To: dac-at-research.umass.edu 7, 23 -- User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.19) Gecko/20081204 SeaMonkey/1.1.14 7, 23 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 7, 23 -- To: Microscopy Listserver {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 7, 23 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] Re: viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters 7, 23 -- only 7, 23 -- References: {200901090743.n097ht8p015453-at-ns.microscopy.com} 7, 23 -- In-Reply-To: {200901090743.n097ht8p015453-at-ns.microscopy.com} 7, 23 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed 7, 23 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 7, 23 -- X-Whitelist: TRUE ==============================End of - Headers==============================
This Question/Comment was submitted to the Microscopy Listserver using the WWW based Form at http://microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/MLFormMail.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember this posting is most likely not from a Subscriber, so when replying please copy both jinsong-wu-at-northwestern.edu as well as the MIcroscopy Listserver ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title-Subject: [Filtered] cryo-TEM positions at Northwestern Univ.
Question: Two Open Positions Research Associate or Research Faculty Cryo-Electron Microscopy of Soft and Biological Structures Northwestern University, Evanston, IL Two research associate/research faculty positions are immediately available at Northwestern University in the area of analytical cryo- electron microscopy of soft and biological structures. Supported by the Keck Foundation, Chicago Biomedical Consortium and other federally funded research programs, the two positions are created to advance specimen preparation of biological structures for electron microscopy, especially oocytes, and the use of analytical TEM/STEM techniques to monitor bioelemental distribution across sub-cellular compartments at nanoscale spatial resolution. The research will principally employ a unique dual-EDS dedicated Hitachi cryo- STEM (based on HD-2300A platform) to be installed at Northwestern in summer 2009. In addition, the Northwestern University Atomic and Nanoscale Characterization Experimental (NUANCE) Center (www.nuance.northwestern.edu) and Quantitative Bioelement Imaging Center (QBIC) in the in the Chemistry of Life Processes Institute (http://www.clp.northwestern.edu/) have several SEMs/S/TEMs and complementary confocal, optical, scanning probe and laser-ablation mass spectrometry capabilities. The candidates are expected to develop cryo-specimen preparation protocols for oocytes and conduct analytical studies of elemental distribution in complex biological structures using STEM imaging and EDS analysis. The project is a part of extensive interdisciplinary collaborative initiatives among Professors Vinayak P. Dravid (www.northwestern.edu/vpdgroup), Tom OíHalloran (http://chemgroups.northwestern.edu/ohalloran/), Teresa Woodruff (http://www.northwestern.edu/neurobiology/faculty/Woodruff2/) and Jonathan Silverstein (http://home.uchicago.edu/~jcs/) to unravel the mysteries of nanoscale chemical architecture of Oocyte at various stages of fertilization. As a result, there are ample opportunities for personal and professional growth at the intersection of life and physical sciences, medicine and advanced instrumentation. The positions require a PhD in physical/biological sciences/engineering. Considerable experience in analytical and cryo-S/TEM is required and hands-on training in cryo-preparation techniques is highly desirable. Prior knowledge of imaging filter/spectral imaging and EELS is desirable but not mandatory. The positions are available immediately for at least two years, with the possibility for extension for additional period upon mutual agreement. Salary and compensation would commensurate with experience. Please forward curriculum vitae with three references to: Mr. Kim McCumber Email: ohalloran-ofc-at-northwestern.edu
I work in a place that does not permit the use of Uranyl salts for EM use because of the radiation dangers (and a healthy respect for ALARA), and am always trying to educate people about what these dangers are with facts. Thus I was very interested in this thread.
I did have a question on the post by Ayten that I hope someone will answer: I am not a nuclear engineer, so I readily acknowledge that I am far from an expert on the subject. But the website Ayten provided gives the branch ratio for decay of U-238 to Th-234 as 0.00005% (along with the half-life given in Dale's response). Would that not also make the amount of beta radiation small?
It was interesting to read in Alex's post about how the presence of U-235 causes alarms to go off. Commercially available (United States, Electron Microscopy Sciences, technical data sheet for Uranyl Acetate, available at www.emsdiasum.com) is listed as 0.1% U235, so there is *some* U235 present, at least for this supplier (Ted Pella lists the composition as 0.3-0.4% U235). EMS also gives a reading for Alpha and Beta radiation for a 100 g sample, and gives a value of .51 uCi/g for the specific activity (they state a material with a value of } 0.002 uCi/g is considered radioactive).
I would also like to agree with Dale on his remarks on the tone of Ayten's response. This should be a place that, even though we may disagree, our mutual respect for one another allows us to be civil and polite, and fosters healthy debates in cases of contention.
Thank you, Jessica
____________________ Jessica Cervantes, MS
-----Original Message----- X-from: dac-at-research.umass.edu [mailto:dac-at-research.umass.edu] Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 6:42 AM To: Cervantes, Jessica
Dear Ayten,
Your comments are informative but, to my personal taste, definitely a bit negative in tone for this list. Your "schooling" of Alex isn't really necessary and I think we could get your information in a more positive and collegial way.
Regarding the decay tree, I note from the provided link information that
the half-life of U-238 is { {4.468E+9 years} } . It has been a while since
my high school chemistry but I'm wondering how much Th-234 and associated beta emission danger we are really dealing with here; seems like there must be a very small amount of Th-234 produced with such a long half-life of the original U-238. Maybe you could comment on the danger of this.
Thanks,
Dale
celikaktas-at-gmail.com wrote: } ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- } } Dear Alex, } } Did you have a chance to check the information from } } http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html } } Let me construct the decay tree. I'm sure everybody in this list can } do it but, you keep insisting that "uranyl compounds are alpha } emitters only" so, I will take the time to do the job and post in to } the list. } } Let's start with U-238 which is the starting element in your compound. } } 1) U-238 decays into Th-234 by Alpha decay } } 2) Th-234 decays into Pa-234 by Beta decay } } 3) Pa-234 decays into U-234 by Beta decay } } 4) U-234 decays into Th-230 by Alpha decay } } 5) Th-230 decays into Ra-226 by Alpha decay } } 6) Ra-226 decays into Rn-222 by Alpha decay } } 7) Rn-222 decays into Po-218 by Alpha decay } } 8) Po-218 decays into Pb-214 by Alpha decay } } 9) Pb-214 decays into Bi-214 by Beta decay } } 10) Bi-214 decays into Po-214 by Beta decay } } 11) Po-214 decays into Pb-210 by Alpha decay } } 12) Pb-210 decays into Bi-210 by Beta decay } } 13) Bi-210 decays into Po-210 by Beta decay } } 14) Po-210 decays into Pb-206 by Alpha decay } } Pb-206 is STABLE so, it is the last element to be produced as a result } of U-238 radioactive decay. } } I have constructed the above decay tree using the information from } http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html } While constructing the above decay tree I have used the branch which } has the highest branch ratio (above 99% in each case). } } I do not understand why you are trying to keep things "under control"? } } By the way, I'm a Nuclear Engineer. } } One does not even need to be nuclear engineer to understand this. Even } in high school science classes people learn about radioactive decay } series e.g. A decays into B and B decays into C... } } Best, } Ayten. }
==============================Original Headers============================== 7, 23 -- From dac-at-research.umass.edu Fri Jan 9 08:36:22 2009 7, 23 -- Received: from race5.oit.umass.edu (race5.oit.umass.edu [128.119.101.41]) 7, 23 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09EaMPb032435 7, 23 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 08:36:22 -0600 7, 23 -- Received: from [172.30.55.164] (eutopia.bio.umass.edu [128.119.55.30]) 7, 23 -- (authenticated bits=0) 7, 23 -- by race5.oit.umass.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n09EaLpI010451 7, 23 -- (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) 7, 23 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:36:22 -0500 7, 23 -- Message-ID: {49676117.7030802-at-research.umass.edu} 7, 23 -- Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 09:37:11 -0500 7, 23 -- From: Dale Callaham {dac-at-research.umass.edu} 7, 23 -- Reply-To: dac-at-research.umass.edu 7, 23 -- User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.19) Gecko/20081204 SeaMonkey/1.1.14 7, 23 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 7, 23 -- To: Microscopy Listserver {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 7, 23 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] Re: viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters 7, 23 -- only 7, 23 -- References: {200901090743.n097ht8p015453-at-ns.microscopy.com} 7, 23 -- In-Reply-To: {200901090743.n097ht8p015453-at-ns.microscopy.com} 7, 23 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed 7, 23 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 7, 23 -- X-Whitelist: TRUE ==============================End of - Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 24, 22 -- From cervantes-at-bendres.com Fri Jan 9 12:37:17 2009 24, 22 -- Received: from smtp.bendres.com (smtp.bendres.com [67.59.84.113]) 24, 22 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09IbGAs002132 24, 22 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:37:17 -0600 24, 22 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message 24, 22 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 24, 22 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 24, 22 -- charset="us-ascii" 24, 22 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 24, 22 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters 24, 22 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 10:37:16 -0800 24, 22 -- Message-ID: {82C755170EE5C44BA26E35A7F6B3864A040C1F-at-dixie.bri.local} 24, 22 -- In-Reply-To: {200901091442.n09Eg4GH008217-at-ns.microscopy.com} 24, 22 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: 24, 22 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 24, 22 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters 24, 22 -- Thread-Index: AclyaHEzMn7sIVgATIeELTj+MUIUqwAFW70Q 24, 22 -- References: {200901091442.n09Eg4GH008217-at-ns.microscopy.com} 24, 22 -- From: "Cervantes, Jessica" {cervantes-at-bendres.com} 24, 22 -- To: {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 24, 22 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 24, 22 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n09IbGAs002132 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
On Jan 9, 2009, at 10:37 AM, cervantes-at-bendres.com wrote:
} I did have a question on the post by Ayten that I hope someone will } answer: I am not a nuclear engineer, so I readily acknowledge that I } am } far from an expert on the subject. But the website Ayten provided } gives } the branch ratio for decay of U-238 to Th-234 as 0.00005% (along with } the half-life given in Dale's response). Would that not also make the } amount of beta radiation small?
Dear Jessica, The amount of Th234 is, indeed, small, but the branching ratio for U238 -} Th234 is close to 100%--the Handbook of Chemistry and Physics also lists SF (spontaneous fission), but this is very rare. Assuming that the process of depleting the U will also get rid of any Th originally mixed in with the natural U, the long half life of U238 means that the amount of Th234 will be small for the first few billion years or so. In any case, the ranges of both alpha and beta particles in glass are smaller than the thickness of the bottle, so a jar of UA will not have either alpha or beta particles traveling to the outside world. The Handbook does also list 3 particle energies for U238 alpha particles, which arise due to the possibility of decay into 3 states of Th234--the ground state and two excited states. These excited states will decay to the ground state, usually by emitting a gamma ray, which will penetrate the jar, a good distance through the air, and your hand (if you are holding the jar). It is these gammas that pose the greatest risk from a sealed jar of UA. For the nit-pickers, the gammas can scatter off atoms in the jar to produce secondary electrons, some of which may be produced close enough to the outer surface of the jar to penetrate into the air, so it is not entirely accurate to say no beta radiation could ever be detected outside the jar. As previously stated by several listers, the major danger from UA is ingestion or inhalation. The same properties of alpha radiation that prevent it from penetrating the dead layer of the skin also dictate that the entire energy of the alpha decay will be deposited in a small volume either on the inner surface of the lung or in the digestive tract and other parts of the body that the U can be transported to or deposited in. This large amount of energy will produce many ion pairs, since one ion pair is produced for every ~30 eV of energy deposited, and the decay energy is 4.268 MeV. The damage done to a cell in which these ions are produced is usually fatal to the cell, but can also be severe without killing the cell, in which case, the cell can become cancerous. Therefore, such activities as weighing UA to make solutions, pipetting UA, which can produce very small droplets that evaporate leaving a small particle of UA, and other handling of UA, especially the solid from the jar, should always be performed with the knowledge that there is risk. ALARA dictates that these procedures be performed in a hood (into which there is a substantial flow of air), and that they are only performed in a limited area, which should be frequently monitored for spilled UA (and any other radioactive materials that might be used) by measuring with a detector and by taking swabs in and around the area that will also be tested for the presence of radiation. Different states and countries have different laws that determine the minimum amount of monitoring, and different institutions have more restrictive policies, so there is no single procedure that is universally followed, but it is very important that each person follow the procedures EHS sets up in one's lab, and even more important that everyone takes safety seriously. Yours, Bill Tivol, PhD EM Scientist Ultrafast EM Facility Noyes Laboratory, MC 127-72 California Institute of Technology Pasadena CA 91125 (626) 395-8833 tivol-at-caltech.edu
==============================Original Headers============================== 6, 22 -- From tivol-at-caltech.edu Fri Jan 9 13:38:14 2009 6, 22 -- Received: from outgoing-mail.its.caltech.edu (outgoing-mail.its.caltech.edu [131.215.239.19]) 6, 22 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09JcDnK017471 6, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 13:38:13 -0600 6, 22 -- Received: from fire-doxen.imss.caltech.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) 6, 22 -- by fire-doxen-postvirus (Postfix) with ESMTP id 592CC32A786 6, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:38:13 -0800 (PST) 6, 22 -- X-Spam-Scanned: at Caltech-IMSS on fire-doxen by amavisd-new 6, 22 -- Received: from DHCP-19-146.caltech.edu (DHCP-19-146.caltech.edu [131.215.19.146]) 6, 22 -- by fire-doxen-ssl (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2E4A32A703 6, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:38:11 -0800 (PST) 6, 22 -- Message-Id: {B018E32F-06FA-4F4B-BE9C-6D4B5EB5C94E-at-caltech.edu} 6, 22 -- From: Bill Tivol {tivol-at-caltech.edu} 6, 22 -- To: microscopy-at-microscopy.com 6, 22 -- In-Reply-To: {200901091837.n09IbP7p002260-at-ns.microscopy.com} 6, 22 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes 6, 22 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 6, 22 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) 6, 22 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] RE: viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters 6, 22 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:38:11 -0800 6, 22 -- References: {200901091837.n09IbP7p002260-at-ns.microscopy.com} 6, 22 -- X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) ==============================End of - Headers==============================
I used to work as a 'radiochemist' making radioactive isotope products and standards, including Uranium. FYI, you can calculate the specific activity, A, from the data you cited:
A = yN, (y should be a 'lambda', sorry!), and A is disintigrations per time (usually sec or min)
y = ln2 / T, where T is half life of isotope. (Convert half-life to seconds to give disintegrations per second.)
N = number of atoms of that isotope (per gram for specific activity).
There are daughter products from the decay, and as you mentioned, there might be U-235 as well, though the manufacturer stated it was clean of this.
By the way, after working as a radio / nuclear chemist, I don't subscribe totally to the ALARA principle. We take about 360mrem/yr background just living in USA. Also, a long roundtrip plane flight will give you up to 10mrem. The risks are negligible.
Hope that helps.
Don
Don Kloos VP Sales, Marketing, Business Development Parallax Research, Inc.
-----Original Message----- X-from: cervantes-at-bendres.com [mailto:cervantes-at-bendres.com] Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 10:47 AM To: dkloos-at-parallaxray.com
I work in a place that does not permit the use of Uranyl salts for EM use because of the radiation dangers (and a healthy respect for ALARA), and am always trying to educate people about what these dangers are with facts. Thus I was very interested in this thread.
I did have a question on the post by Ayten that I hope someone will answer: I am not a nuclear engineer, so I readily acknowledge that I am far from an expert on the subject. But the website Ayten provided gives the branch ratio for decay of U-238 to Th-234 as 0.00005% (along with the half-life given in Dale's response). Would that not also make the amount of beta radiation small?
It was interesting to read in Alex's post about how the presence of U-235 causes alarms to go off. Commercially available (United States, Electron Microscopy Sciences, technical data sheet for Uranyl Acetate, available at www.emsdiasum.com) is listed as 0.1% U235, so there is *some* U235 present, at least for this supplier (Ted Pella lists the composition as 0.3-0.4% U235). EMS also gives a reading for Alpha and Beta radiation for a 100 g sample, and gives a value of .51 uCi/g for the specific activity (they state a material with a value of } 0.002 uCi/g is considered radioactive).
I would also like to agree with Dale on his remarks on the tone of Ayten's response. This should be a place that, even though we may disagree, our mutual respect for one another allows us to be civil and polite, and fosters healthy debates in cases of contention.
Thank you, Jessica
____________________ Jessica Cervantes, MS
-----Original Message----- X-from: dac-at-research.umass.edu [mailto:dac-at-research.umass.edu] Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 6:42 AM To: Cervantes, Jessica
Dear Ayten,
Your comments are informative but, to my personal taste, definitely a bit negative in tone for this list. Your "schooling" of Alex isn't really necessary and I think we could get your information in a more positive and collegial way.
Regarding the decay tree, I note from the provided link information that
the half-life of U-238 is { {4.468E+9 years} } . It has been a while since
my high school chemistry but I'm wondering how much Th-234 and associated beta emission danger we are really dealing with here; seems like there must be a very small amount of Th-234 produced with such a long half-life of the original U-238. Maybe you could comment on the danger of this.
Thanks,
Dale
celikaktas-at-gmail.com wrote: } ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- } } Dear Alex, } } Did you have a chance to check the information from } } http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html } } Let me construct the decay tree. I'm sure everybody in this list can } do it but, you keep insisting that "uranyl compounds are alpha } emitters only" so, I will take the time to do the job and post in to } the list. } } Let's start with U-238 which is the starting element in your compound. } } 1) U-238 decays into Th-234 by Alpha decay } } 2) Th-234 decays into Pa-234 by Beta decay } } 3) Pa-234 decays into U-234 by Beta decay } } 4) U-234 decays into Th-230 by Alpha decay } } 5) Th-230 decays into Ra-226 by Alpha decay } } 6) Ra-226 decays into Rn-222 by Alpha decay } } 7) Rn-222 decays into Po-218 by Alpha decay } } 8) Po-218 decays into Pb-214 by Alpha decay } } 9) Pb-214 decays into Bi-214 by Beta decay } } 10) Bi-214 decays into Po-214 by Beta decay } } 11) Po-214 decays into Pb-210 by Alpha decay } } 12) Pb-210 decays into Bi-210 by Beta decay } } 13) Bi-210 decays into Po-210 by Beta decay } } 14) Po-210 decays into Pb-206 by Alpha decay } } Pb-206 is STABLE so, it is the last element to be produced as a result } of U-238 radioactive decay. } } I have constructed the above decay tree using the information from } http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html } While constructing the above decay tree I have used the branch which } has the highest branch ratio (above 99% in each case). } } I do not understand why you are trying to keep things "under control"? } } By the way, I'm a Nuclear Engineer. } } One does not even need to be nuclear engineer to understand this. Even } in high school science classes people learn about radioactive decay } series e.g. A decays into B and B decays into C... } } Best, } Ayten. }
==============================Original Headers============================== 7, 23 -- From dac-at-research.umass.edu Fri Jan 9 08:36:22 2009 7, 23 -- Received: from race5.oit.umass.edu (race5.oit.umass.edu [128.119.101.41]) 7, 23 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09EaMPb032435 7, 23 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 08:36:22 -0600 7, 23 -- Received: from [172.30.55.164] (eutopia.bio.umass.edu [128.119.55.30]) 7, 23 -- (authenticated bits=0) 7, 23 -- by race5.oit.umass.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n09EaLpI010451 7, 23 -- (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) 7, 23 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:36:22 -0500 7, 23 -- Message-ID: {49676117.7030802-at-research.umass.edu} 7, 23 -- Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 09:37:11 -0500 7, 23 -- From: Dale Callaham {dac-at-research.umass.edu} 7, 23 -- Reply-To: dac-at-research.umass.edu 7, 23 -- User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.19) Gecko/20081204 SeaMonkey/1.1.14 7, 23 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 7, 23 -- To: Microscopy Listserver {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 7, 23 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] Re: viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters 7, 23 -- only 7, 23 -- References: {200901090743.n097ht8p015453-at-ns.microscopy.com} 7, 23 -- In-Reply-To: {200901090743.n097ht8p015453-at-ns.microscopy.com} 7, 23 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed 7, 23 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 7, 23 -- X-Whitelist: TRUE ==============================End of - Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 24, 22 -- From cervantes-at-bendres.com Fri Jan 9 12:37:17 2009 24, 22 -- Received: from smtp.bendres.com (smtp.bendres.com [67.59.84.113]) 24, 22 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09IbGAs002132 24, 22 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 12:37:17 -0600 24, 22 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message 24, 22 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 24, 22 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 24, 22 -- charset="us-ascii" 24, 22 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 24, 22 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters 24, 22 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 10:37:16 -0800 24, 22 -- Message-ID: {82C755170EE5C44BA26E35A7F6B3864A040C1F-at-dixie.bri.local} 24, 22 -- In-Reply-To: {200901091442.n09Eg4GH008217-at-ns.microscopy.com} 24, 22 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: 24, 22 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 24, 22 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters 24, 22 -- Thread-Index: AclyaHEzMn7sIVgATIeELTj+MUIUqwAFW70Q 24, 22 -- References: {200901091442.n09Eg4GH008217-at-ns.microscopy.com} 24, 22 -- From: "Cervantes, Jessica" {cervantes-at-bendres.com} 24, 22 -- To: {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 24, 22 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 24, 22 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n09IbGAs002132 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 41, 30 -- From dkloos-at-parallaxray.com Fri Jan 9 13:44:23 2009 41, 30 -- Received: from cp18.heritagewebdesign.com (cp18.heritagewebdesign.com [209.90.77.54]) 41, 30 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09JiLtE026720 41, 30 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 13:44:22 -0600 41, 30 -- Received: from user-0c8gg59.cable.mindspring.com ([24.136.64.169] helo=donl) 41, 30 -- by cp18.heritagewebdesign.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) 41, 30 -- (envelope-from {dkloos-at-parallaxray.com} ) 41, 30 -- id 1LLNHN-000AxF-NI; Fri, 09 Jan 2009 12:44:25 -0700 41, 30 -- Reply-To: {dkloos-at-parallaxray.com} 41, 30 -- From: "Don Kloos" {dkloos-at-parallaxray.com} 41, 30 -- To: {cervantes-at-bendres.com} 41, 30 -- Cc: {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 41, 30 -- References: {200901091847.n09IlB3t015536-at-ns.microscopy.com} 41, 30 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] RE: viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters 41, 30 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:44:13 -0800 41, 30 -- Organization: Parallax Research 41, 30 -- Message-ID: {E956386CB52E4F8488CB5A61C09C99D8-at-donl} 41, 30 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 41, 30 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 41, 30 -- charset="us-ascii" 41, 30 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 41, 30 -- X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 41, 30 -- Thread-Index: AclyirXsDrkzft58SYy5CgCv2E93aQABANEw 41, 30 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 41, 30 -- In-Reply-To: {200901091847.n09IlB3t015536-at-ns.microscopy.com} 41, 30 -- X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report 41, 30 -- X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cp18.heritagewebdesign.com 41, 30 -- X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - microscopy.com 41, 30 -- X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [26 6] / [26 6] 41, 30 -- X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - parallaxray.com ==============================End of - Headers==============================
On Jan 9, 2009, at 11:44 AM, dkloos-at-parallaxray.com wrote:
} By the way, after working as a radio / nuclear chemist, I don't } subscribe } totally to the ALARA principle. We take about 360mrem/yr background } just } living in USA. Also, a long roundtrip plane flight will give you up } to } 10mrem. The risks are negligible.
Dear Don, It is very true that there is background radiation, and it is still not known whether any increases over background cause a proportional increase in risk, but since the R stands for "reasonably", ALARA should be followed. Yours, Bill Tivol, PhD EM Scientist Ultrafast EM Facility Noyes Laboratory, MC 127-72 California Institute of Technology Pasadena CA 91125 (626) 395-8833 tivol-at-caltech.edu
==============================Original Headers============================== 6, 22 -- From tivol-at-caltech.edu Fri Jan 9 13:56:58 2009 6, 22 -- Received: from outgoing-mail.its.caltech.edu (outgoing-mail.its.caltech.edu [131.215.239.19]) 6, 22 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09JuwMj012369 6, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 13:56:58 -0600 6, 22 -- Received: from fire-doxen.imss.caltech.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) 6, 22 -- by fire-doxen-postvirus (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBC3C328E87 6, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:56:57 -0800 (PST) 6, 22 -- X-Spam-Scanned: at Caltech-IMSS on fire-doxen by amavisd-new 6, 22 -- Received: from DHCP-19-146.caltech.edu (DHCP-19-146.caltech.edu [131.215.19.146]) 6, 22 -- by fire-doxen-ssl (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA21532A846 6, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:56:56 -0800 (PST) 6, 22 -- Message-Id: {D4A7F8CA-339B-441B-ADF1-3F617A2A4FD4-at-caltech.edu} 6, 22 -- From: Bill Tivol {tivol-at-caltech.edu} 6, 22 -- To: microscopy-at-microscopy.com 6, 22 -- In-Reply-To: {200901091944.n09JiUPN026950-at-ns.microscopy.com} 6, 22 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes 6, 22 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 6, 22 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) 6, 22 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters 6, 22 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:56:56 -0800 6, 22 -- References: {200901091944.n09JiUPN026950-at-ns.microscopy.com} 6, 22 -- X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) ==============================End of - Headers==============================
Thanks to all of you who have responded to my recent query. I'm sure that I will have more as time passes, and I appreciate the fantastic response that I've had from the list.
Since we are on the topic of the dangers of EM work (the uranyl acetate thread), I have a question about cacodylate buffer. I'm getting set to teach an introductory EM course for biologists to undergraduates. Having interviewed two of my three students during the previous semester, I know that I will be starting very much at zero. They had no to little knowledge of what "EM" is or can be used for before I spoke with them - they are exploring this new class. My plan is to take them through the preparation of plant, animal, and some sort of micro sample via traditional chemical fixation methods and keep it as simple as possible. I am inclined to steer clear of cacodylate buffer due to its toxicity and because they have enough to deal with already, and stick with phosphate buffer. However, I have noticed that most if not all of the animal tissue protocols I've been perusing use cac buffer. Is there any reason why I should keep it in the protocol?
Thanks for your advice. Kristen
Kristen A. Lennon, Ph.D. Lecturer, Department of Biology 202 Compton Science Center Frostburg State University 101 Braddock Road Frostburg, MD 21532
k.lennon-at-frostburg.edu
==============================Original Headers============================== 7, 20 -- From kamlennon-at-yahoo.com Fri Jan 9 13:57:15 2009 7, 20 -- Received: from web84004.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web84004.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.206.174]) 7, 20 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with SMTP id n09JvEx0012745 7, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 13:57:14 -0600 7, 20 -- Received: (qmail 76571 invoked by uid 60001); 9 Jan 2009 19:57:14 -0000 7, 20 -- DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; 7, 20 -- s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; 7, 20 -- h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID; 7, 20 -- b=xeLr+fOkc5vJ3EXto1Y6+o7SUjRsZmyWr021p/AR8+eZSkJdh5uAKRIqv7XOXlDD/DxqNcT7zKQfKkLZ8xb+qim3FguZ95OneP3PcPPuzZm7XdHTVOeaRk/Onkfmz9gH67KG3edVJa6kzqjAXn/Wmi6J6hcnTSKOM2Iqc98V+Tg=; 7, 20 -- X-YMail-OSG: LFU8udYVM1kiLkk70s8A_YJn70xTwWxw7CGSMeW3AL1T.rnd4LZsOXO_lJUYOJekMg-- 7, 20 -- Received: from [96.239.149.81] by web84004.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 09 Jan 2009 11:57:13 PST 7, 20 -- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.7.260.1 7, 20 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:57:13 -0800 (PST) 7, 20 -- From: Kristen Lennon {kamlennon-at-yahoo.com} 7, 20 -- Reply-To: kamlennon-at-yahoo.com 7, 20 -- Subject: Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? 7, 20 -- To: Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com 7, 20 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 7, 20 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 7, 20 -- Message-ID: {982974.76126.qm-at-web84004.mail.mud.yahoo.com} ==============================End of - Headers==============================
There are 2 ways of looking at this: first, phosphate and other buffers work as well as cacodylate, the difference between cac and PO4, e.g., is mostly preference and what one is used to seeing. So why use a toxin that can be avoided? Especially since some people (like me) are sensitive to the arsenic. The other way is: sometimes cacodylate is needed, and the students will have to be using other toxic materials in microscopy and chemistry and biotechnology and ... in other words, they need to learn how to properly handle such materials, and the sooner they learn the better, so use it.
There, microambiguity. In our EM courses, I avoid cacodylate (because I'm sensitive), but we do make it available if needed, or if a student wants to use it for a project.
Generally, though, when you're teaching about buffers, there are a lot more to discuss than just PO4 or cacodylate. If the class is doing aquatic critters (algae, protistans, tiny inverts, and suchlike), then the best buffer is 0.02 micron filtered water from where the crittere were collected.
Phil
} Hello Again Listers, } } Thanks to all of you who have responded to my recent query. I'm sure } that I will have more as time passes, and I appreciate the fantastic } response that I've had from the list. } } Since we are on the topic of the dangers of EM work (the uranyl } acetate thread), I have a question about cacodylate buffer. I'm } getting set to teach an introductory EM course for biologists to } undergraduates. Having interviewed two of my three students during } the previous semester, I know that I will be starting very much at } zero. They had no to little knowledge of what "EM" is or can be used } for before I spoke with them - they are exploring this new class. My } plan is to take them through the preparation of plant, animal, and } some sort of micro sample via traditional chemical fixation methods } and keep it as simple as possible. I am inclined to steer clear of } cacodylate buffer due to its toxicity and because they have enough } to deal with already, and stick with phosphate buffer. However, I } have noticed that most if not all of the animal tissue protocols } I've been perusing use cac buffer. Is there any reason why I should } keep it in the protocol? } } Thanks for your advice. } Kristen } } Kristen A. Lennon, Ph.D. } Lecturer, Department of Biology } 202 Compton Science Center } Frostburg State University } 101 Braddock Road } Frostburg, MD 21532 } } k.lennon-at-frostburg.edu -- Philip Oshel Microscopy Facility Supervisor Biology Department 024C Brooks Hall Central Michigan University Mt. Pleasant, MI 48859 (989) 774-3576
==============================Original Headers============================== 6, 25 -- From oshel1pe-at-cmich.edu Fri Jan 9 14:13:13 2009 6, 25 -- Received: from ob4.cmich.edu (ob4.cmich.edu [141.209.20.25]) 6, 25 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09KDCn7007223 6, 25 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:13:13 -0600 6, 25 -- Received: from egatea.central.cmich.local ([141.209.15.74]) 6, 25 -- by ob4.cmich.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id n09KDBgb017674 6, 25 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:13:11 -0500 6, 25 -- Received: from [141.209.160.249] ([141.209.160.249]) by egatea.central.cmich.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); 6, 25 -- Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:13:02 -0500 6, 25 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 6, 25 -- Message-Id: {f06240804c58d5e6fc0f6-at-[141.209.160.249]} 6, 25 -- In-Reply-To: {200901092000.n09K0PVw024065-at-ns.microscopy.com} 6, 25 -- References: {200901092000.n09K0PVw024065-at-ns.microscopy.com} 6, 25 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:13:00 -0500 6, 25 -- To: Microscopy-at-microscopy.com 6, 25 -- From: Philip Oshel {oshel1pe-at-cmich.edu} 6, 25 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? 6, 25 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" 6, 25 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jan 2009 20:13:02.0896 (UTC) FILETIME=[ACF1D300:01C97296] 6, 25 -- X-Canit-CHI2: 0.00 6, 25 -- X-Bayes-Prob: 0.0001 (Score -0.5, tokens from: -at--at-RPTN, default) 6, 25 -- X-Spam-Score: -4.20 () [Hold at 5.00] L_EXCH_MF,L_USD,RDNS_NONE,Bayes(0.0001,-0.5) 6, 25 -- X-CanItPRO-Stream: default 6, 25 -- X-Canit-Stats-ID: 7251385 - 9ad74a6e6749 6, 25 -- X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . roaringpenguin . com) on 141.209.20.25 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
As a nuclear engineer you should know better about dangers of radioactivity (by the way, by training I am a physicist.)
Decay tree says us nothing about these dangers. We should know real levels of radiation. What can you say about them? Is level of radiation at 5 inches from open bottle with 25 g of uranil acetate much greater then the one from granite countertop in someone kitchen? I do not know. Since I do not know, I will be cautious, but just cautious, not paranoid.
Let’s see what World Health Association says: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs257/en/
“DEPLETED URANIUM • On average, approximately 90 µg (micrograms) of uranium exists in the human body from normal intakes of water, food and air. About 66% is found in the skeleton, 16% in the liver, 8% in the kidneys and 10% in other tissues. {90 micrograms of uranium, not depleted uranium} • The uranium remaining after removal of the enriched fraction contains about 99.8% 238U, 0.2% 235U and 0.001% 234U by mass; this is referred to as depleted uranium or DU. • Under most circumstances, use of DU will make a negligible contribution to the overall natural background levels of uranium in the environment. Probably the greatest potential for DU exposure will follow conflict where DU munitions are used. • Average annual intakes of uranium by adults are estimated to be about 0.5mg (500 μg) from ingestion of food and water and 0.6 μg from breathing air.â€
So, uranium is everywhere. We should not bother ourselves with decay tree. If in doubt, we should measure radiation. And, of course, we should remember about toxicity of uranium. Gloves, fume hoods, proper treatment of spillage, etc. And when required, we should collect and dispose used chemicals in proper way.
I beg your pardon if you find my reply a bit harsh. I just followed your style.
Regards,
Vladimir
Vladimir M. Dusevich, Ph.D. Electron Microscope Lab Manager 371 School of Dentistry 650 E. 25th Street Kansas City, MO 64108-2784
} -----Original Message----- } From: celikaktas-at-gmail.com [mailto:celikaktas-at-gmail.com] } Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 1:39 AM } To: Dusevich, Vladimir } Subject: [Microscopy] Re: viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha } emitters only } } } } } -------------------------------------------------------------- } -------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy } Society of America To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } -------------------------------------------------------------- } -------------- } } Dear Alex, } } Did you have a chance to check the information from } } http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html } } Let me construct the decay tree. I'm sure everybody in this } list can do it but, you keep insisting that "uranyl compounds } are alpha emitters only" so, I will take the time to do the } job and post in to the list. } } Let's start with U-238 which is the starting element in your compound. } } 1) U-238 decays into Th-234 by Alpha decay } } 2) Th-234 decays into Pa-234 by Beta decay } } 3) Pa-234 decays into U-234 by Beta decay } } 4) U-234 decays into Th-230 by Alpha decay } } 5) Th-230 decays into Ra-226 by Alpha decay } } 6) Ra-226 decays into Rn-222 by Alpha decay } } 7) Rn-222 decays into Po-218 by Alpha decay } } 8) Po-218 decays into Pb-214 by Alpha decay } } 9) Pb-214 decays into Bi-214 by Beta decay } } 10) Bi-214 decays into Po-214 by Beta decay } } 11) Po-214 decays into Pb-210 by Alpha decay } } 12) Pb-210 decays into Bi-210 by Beta decay } } 13) Bi-210 decays into Po-210 by Beta decay } } 14) Po-210 decays into Pb-206 by Alpha decay } } Pb-206 is STABLE so, it is the last element to be produced as } a result of U-238 radioactive decay. } } I have constructed the above decay tree using the information } from http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html } While constructing the above decay tree I have used the } branch which has the highest branch ratio (above 99% in each case). } } I do not understand why you are trying to keep things "under control"? } } By the way, I'm a Nuclear Engineer. } } One does not even need to be nuclear engineer to understand } this. Even in high school science classes people learn about } radioactive decay series e.g. A decays into B and B decays into C... } } Best, } Ayten. } } -- } =========================== } Ayten Celik-Aktas, PhD } Ankara University } Electron Microscopy Laboratory } Ankara, Turkey } =========================== } } } On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:27 AM, {abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com} wrote: } } } } Email: abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com } } Name: Alex Besenyo PhD } } } } Organization: ibilabs } } } } Title-Subject: [Filtered] uranyl compounds are alpha emitters only } } } } Question: Question: } } } } Is it true that the stuff we use has been somehow } } depleted, so that it isn't as radioactive as "real" uranyl } } salts? Or is this yet another old wive's tale of EM?! } } } } Reply: } } } } When we manufacture these compounds we purchase the raw uranium in a } } depleted state from the government. There is no chance for error } } here. We do not use natural uranium. } } } } This means that the enrichable uranium U-235 has been removed. } } The then U-238 which only emitts alpha radiation is procesed. } } } } The term "depleted" means that U-235 has been removed. } } } } If even by the slightest chance that U235 were present then every } } alarm would go off in our facility because Beta and Gamma radiation } } is detected. } } } } I hope this answers everybodies concerns. } } } } Our products are sold exclusively through a distributor network and } } all of them have been instructed on this information. } } } } I only responded when I saw the original post and I had to respond } } before it got out of control. } } } } Sincerely } } Alex Besenyo PhD } } } } } } } } ==============================Original } Headers============================== } 28, 37 -- From celikaktas-at-gmail.com Fri Jan 9 01:38:48 2009 } 28, 37 -- Received: from mail-bw0-f12.google.com } (mail-bw0-f12.google.com [209.85.218.12]) } 28, 37 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) } with ESMTP id n097cllZ007406 } 28, 37 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan } 2009 01:38:48 -0600 } 28, 37 -- Received: by bwz5 with SMTP id 5so20323150bwz.18 } 28, 37 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Thu, 08 } Jan 2009 23:38:46 -0800 (PST) } 28, 37 -- DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; } 28, 37 -- d=gmail.com; s=gamma; } 28, 37 -- } h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to } 28, 37 -- :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type } 28, 37 -- } :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; } 28, 37 -- bh=x3VBln30706ul3mo8rzkKk8tdVV0mnTtpGId5uaYeEM=; } 28, 37 -- } b=qBVYz0biX1/wFlDLibyks38NncsgFjqElzGSuPXOiX+ZCB902M5i3lsMmCryurouqZ } 28, 37 -- } q2vvqo4qq+LQCiFwGfBQltrqfo1jiWYiWnPMwvN3V4b9MDoZd/yjgF76rgbzKDtibrjg } 28, 37 -- Ob/1zXIpi/2mHaPBWSu4mzAG29Fqx67ZL1YFg= } 28, 37 -- DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; } 28, 37 -- d=gmail.com; s=gamma; } 28, 37 -- } h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version } 28, 37 -- } :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition } 28, 37 -- :references; } 28, 37 -- } b=DNSaPkpBjjjni4T+G+pPUuxo3M1nntLysfMKUnfOWQUEElcsWGJ3PmM4uVFQBbtTpT } 28, 37 -- } g+IO1lpZUOd3KJn43j3ed/pgCrIp1p0oTRjteC1sfQN2njKF2xkzfFZtTt2rNMbo4jBE } 28, 37 -- /h849iT1rgdv5cvNLmKbW91LhMbKuR486Rzbg= } 28, 37 -- Received: by 10.103.217.7 with SMTP id } u7mr1380019muq.125.1231486725631; } 28, 37 -- Thu, 08 Jan 2009 23:38:45 -0800 (PST) } 28, 37 -- Received: by 10.102.247.16 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Jan } 2009 23:38:45 -0800 (PST) } 28, 37 -- Message-ID: } {1075c5c10901082338y14d2b189m26ca5f198f5a9454-at-mail.gmail.com} } 28, 37 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:38:45 +0200 } 28, 37 -- From: "Ayten Celik-Aktas" {celikaktas-at-gmail.com} } 28, 37 -- To: abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com, microscopy } {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} } 28, 37 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] viaWWW: uranyl compounds } are alpha emitters only } 28, 37 -- In-Reply-To: {200901090027.n090RYH1022494-at-ns.microscopy.com} } 28, 37 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 } 28, 37 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 } 28, 37 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit } 28, 37 -- Content-Disposition: inline } 28, 37 -- References: {200901090027.n090RYH1022494-at-ns.microscopy.com} } ==============================End of - } Headers============================== } }
==============================Original Headers============================== 14, 25 -- From DusevichV-at-umkc.edu Fri Jan 9 14:13:53 2009 14, 25 -- Received: from KC-MSXPROTO2.kc.umkc.edu (smtp.exchange.umkc.edu [134.193.143.155]) 14, 25 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09KDquJ008557 14, 25 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:13:52 -0600 14, 25 -- Received: from KC-MSX1.kc.umkc.edu ([134.193.32.11]) by KC-MSXPROTO2.kc.umkc.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); 14, 25 -- Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:13:44 -0600 14, 25 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 14, 25 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message 14, 25 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 14, 25 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 14, 25 -- charset="UTF-8" 14, 25 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] Re: viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters only 14, 25 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:13:44 -0600 14, 25 -- Message-ID: {032EC4F75A527A4FA58C5B1B5DECFBB3062CB7AA-at-KC-MSX1.kc.umkc.edu} 14, 25 -- In-Reply-To: {200901090739.n097dQZk008263-at-ns.microscopy.com} 14, 25 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: 14, 25 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 14, 25 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] Re: viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters only 14, 25 -- thread-index: AclyLWbfA0iBUCGrQXeRBZzilk1+5QAaS2kQ 14, 25 -- References: {200901090739.n097dQZk008263-at-ns.microscopy.com} 14, 25 -- From: "Dusevich, Vladimir" {DusevichV-at-umkc.edu} 14, 25 -- To: {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 14, 25 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jan 2009 20:13:44.0274 (UTC) FILETIME=[C59B9B20:01C97296] 14, 25 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 14, 25 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n09KDquJ008557 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
I have found this conversation both enlightening and interesting. One of the things I found interesting is to guess at the location of the submitter. This gives me a measure of my bias. I will say that we have flogged this horse to death, but I want to share a bit of my bias.
The total elimination of risk, no matter if you perceive it as reasonable or not, seems to be a major pre-occupation of our society. This seems to be driven by people whose livelihood is derived from telling us about these dangers. One might expect a bias from them. After all if they are not making you safer, they are not doing their job.
It is difficult to argue against safety precautions and still seem rational, it appears to me that we are taking safety to unreasonable heights. We need to be reminded that nobody gets out of this world alive. You can stay hidden under your bed covers your entire life and bad things will still happen to good people.
At one company I am familiar with, the chemists are not allowed to use toluene. It seems the company believes it just too dangerous to be used by trained professionals.
I suggest you weight the potential dangers from UA against all the dangers from that glass of red wine. I suspect the alcohol is more dangerous.
Having said my 2cents, I’m heading home for grilled meat and a beer.
Living on the edge…… Frank Karl
DusevichV-at-umkc.ed u To 01/09/2009 03:21 frank_karl-at-lincolnelectric.com PM cc
Subject Please respond to [Microscopy] viaWWW: uranyl DusevichV-at-umkc.ed compounds are alpha emitters only u
The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America
Dear Ayten,
As a nuclear engineer you should know better about dangers of radioactivity (by the way, by training I am a physicist.)
Decay tree says us nothing about these dangers. We should know real levels of radiation. What can you say about them? Is level of radiation at 5 inches from open bottle with 25 g of uranil acetate much greater then the one from granite countertop in someone kitchen? I do not know. Since I do not know, I will be cautious, but just cautious, not paranoid.
Let’s see what World Health Association says: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs257/en/
“DEPLETED URANIUM • On average, approximately 90 µg (micrograms) of uranium exists in the human body from normal intakes of water, food and air. About 66% is found in the skeleton, 16% in the liver, 8% in the kidneys and 10% in other tissues. {90 micrograms of uranium, not depleted uranium} • The uranium remaining after removal of the enriched fraction contains about 99.8% 238U, 0.2% 235U and 0.001% 234U by mass; this is referred to as depleted uranium or DU. • Under most circumstances, use of DU will make a negligible contribution to the overall natural background levels of uranium in the environment. Probably the greatest potential for DU exposure will follow conflict where DU munitions are used. • Average annual intakes of uranium by adults are estimated to be about 0.5mg (500 μg) from ingestion of food and water and 0.6 μg from breathing air.â€Â
So, uranium is everywhere. We should not bother ourselves with decay tree. If in doubt, we should measure radiation. And, of course, we should remember about toxicity of uranium. Gloves, fume hoods, proper treatment of spillage, etc. And when required, we should collect and dispose used chemicals in proper way.
I beg your pardon if you find my reply a bit harsh. I just followed your style.
Regards,
Vladimir
Vladimir M. Dusevich, Ph.D. Electron Microscope Lab Manager 371 School of Dentistry 650 E. 25th Street Kansas City, MO 64108-2784
} -----Original Message----- } From: celikaktas-at-gmail.com [mailto:celikaktas-at-gmail.com] } Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 1:39 AM } To: Dusevich, Vladimir } Subject: [Microscopy] Re: viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha } emitters only } } } } } -------------------------------------------------------------- } -------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy } Society of America To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } -------------------------------------------------------------- } -------------- } } Dear Alex, } } Did you have a chance to check the information from } } http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html } } Let me construct the decay tree. I'm sure everybody in this } list can do it but, you keep insisting that "uranyl compounds } are alpha emitters only" so, I will take the time to do the } job and post in to the list. } } Let's start with U-238 which is the starting element in your compound. } } 1) U-238 decays into Th-234 by Alpha decay } } 2) Th-234 decays into Pa-234 by Beta decay } } 3) Pa-234 decays into U-234 by Beta decay } } 4) U-234 decays into Th-230 by Alpha decay } } 5) Th-230 decays into Ra-226 by Alpha decay } } 6) Ra-226 decays into Rn-222 by Alpha decay } } 7) Rn-222 decays into Po-218 by Alpha decay } } 8) Po-218 decays into Pb-214 by Alpha decay } } 9) Pb-214 decays into Bi-214 by Beta decay } } 10) Bi-214 decays into Po-214 by Beta decay } } 11) Po-214 decays into Pb-210 by Alpha decay } } 12) Pb-210 decays into Bi-210 by Beta decay } } 13) Bi-210 decays into Po-210 by Beta decay } } 14) Po-210 decays into Pb-206 by Alpha decay } } Pb-206 is STABLE so, it is the last element to be produced as } a result of U-238 radioactive decay. } } I have constructed the above decay tree using the information } from http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html. } While constructing the above decay tree I have used the } branch which has the highest branch ratio (above 99% in each case). } } I do not understand why you are trying to keep things "under control"? } } By the way, I'm a Nuclear Engineer. } } One does not even need to be nuclear engineer to understand } this. Even in high school science classes people learn about } radioactive decay series e.g. A decays into B and B decays into C... } } Best, } Ayten. } } -- } =========================== } Ayten Celik-Aktas, PhD } Ankara University } Electron Microscopy Laboratory } Ankara, Turkey } =========================== } } } On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:27 AM, {abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com} wrote: } } } } Email: abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com } } Name: Alex Besenyo PhD } } } } Organization: ibilabs } } } } Title-Subject: [Filtered] uranyl compounds are alpha emitters only } } } } Question: Question: } } } } Is it true that the stuff we use has been somehow } } depleted, so that it isn't as radioactive as "real" uranyl } } salts? Or is this yet another old wive's tale of EM?! } } } } Reply: } } } } When we manufacture these compounds we purchase the raw uranium in a } } depleted state from the government. There is no chance for error } } here. We do not use natural uranium. } } } } This means that the enrichable uranium U-235 has been removed. } } The then U-238 which only emitts alpha radiation is procesed. } } } } The term "depleted" means that U-235 has been removed. } } } } If even by the slightest chance that U235 were present then every } } alarm would go off in our facility because Beta and Gamma radiation } } is detected. } } } } I hope this answers everybodies concerns. } } } } Our products are sold exclusively through a distributor network and } } all of them have been instructed on this information. } } } } I only responded when I saw the original post and I had to respond } } before it got out of control. } } } } Sincerely } } Alex Besenyo PhD } } } } } } } } ==============================Original } Headers============================== } 28, 37 -- From celikaktas-at-gmail.com Fri Jan 9 01:38:48 2009 } 28, 37 -- Received: from mail-bw0-f12.google.com } (mail-bw0-f12.google.com [209.85.218.12]) } 28, 37 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) } with ESMTP id n097cllZ007406 } 28, 37 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan } 2009 01:38:48 -0600 } 28, 37 -- Received: by bwz5 with SMTP id 5so20323150bwz.18 } 28, 37 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Thu, 08 } Jan 2009 23:38:46 -0800 (PST) } 28, 37 -- DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; } 28, 37 -- d=gmail.com; s=gamma; } 28, 37 -- } h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to } 28, 37 -- :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type } 28, 37 -- } :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; } 28, 37 -- bh=x3VBln30706ul3mo8rzkKk8tdVV0mnTtpGId5uaYeEM=; } 28, 37 -- } b=qBVYz0biX1/wFlDLibyks38NncsgFjqElzGSuPXOiX+ZCB902M5i3lsMmCryurouqZ } 28, 37 -- } q2vvqo4qq+LQCiFwGfBQltrqfo1jiWYiWnPMwvN3V4b9MDoZd/yjgF76rgbzKDtibrjg } 28, 37 -- Ob/1zXIpi/2mHaPBWSu4mzAG29Fqx67ZL1YFg= } 28, 37 -- DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; } 28, 37 -- d=gmail.com; s=gamma; } 28, 37 -- } h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version } 28, 37 -- } :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition } 28, 37 -- :references; } 28, 37 -- } b=DNSaPkpBjjjni4T+G+pPUuxo3M1nntLysfMKUnfOWQUEElcsWGJ3PmM4uVFQBbtTpT } 28, 37 -- } g+IO1lpZUOd3KJn43j3ed/pgCrIp1p0oTRjteC1sfQN2njKF2xkzfFZtTt2rNMbo4jBE } 28, 37 -- /h849iT1rgdv5cvNLmKbW91LhMbKuR486Rzbg= } 28, 37 -- Received: by 10.103.217.7 with SMTP id } u7mr1380019muq.125.1231486725631; } 28, 37 -- Thu, 08 Jan 2009 23:38:45 -0800 (PST) } 28, 37 -- Received: by 10.102.247.16 with HTTP; Thu, 8 Jan } 2009 23:38:45 -0800 (PST) } 28, 37 -- Message-ID: } {1075c5c10901082338y14d2b189m26ca5f198f5a9454-at-mail.gmail.com} } 28, 37 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 09:38:45 +0200 } 28, 37 -- From: "Ayten Celik-Aktas" {celikaktas-at-gmail.com} } 28, 37 -- To: abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com, microscopy } {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} } 28, 37 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] viaWWW: uranyl compounds } are alpha emitters only } 28, 37 -- In-Reply-To: {200901090027.n090RYH1022494-at-ns.microscopy.com} } 28, 37 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 } 28, 37 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 } 28, 37 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit } 28, 37 -- Content-Disposition: inline } 28, 37 -- References: {200901090027.n090RYH1022494-at-ns.microscopy.com} } ==============================End of - } Headers============================== } }
==============================Original Headers============================== 14, 25 -- From DusevichV-at-umkc.edu Fri Jan 9 14:13:53 2009 14, 25 -- Received: from KC-MSXPROTO2.kc.umkc.edu (smtp.exchange.umkc.edu [134.193.143.155]) 14, 25 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09KDquJ008557 14, 25 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:13:52 -0600 14, 25 -- Received: from KC-MSX1.kc.umkc.edu ([134.193.32.11]) by KC-MSXPROTO2.kc.umkc.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); 14, 25 -- Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:13:44 -0600 14, 25 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 14, 25 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message 14, 25 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 14, 25 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 14, 25 -- charset="UTF-8" 14, 25 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] Re: viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters only 14, 25 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:13:44 -0600 14, 25 -- Message-ID: {032EC4F75A527A4FA58C5B1B5DECFBB3062CB7AA-at-KC-MSX1.kc.umkc.edu} 14, 25 -- In-Reply-To: {200901090739.n097dQZk008263-at-ns.microscopy.com} 14, 25 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: 14, 25 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 14, 25 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] Re: viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters only 14, 25 -- thread-index: AclyLWbfA0iBUCGrQXeRBZzilk1+5QAaS2kQ 14, 25 -- References: {200901090739.n097dQZk008263-at-ns.microscopy.com} 14, 25 -- From: "Dusevich, Vladimir" {DusevichV-at-umkc.edu} 14, 25 -- To: {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 14, 25 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jan 2009 20:13:44.0274 (UTC) FILETIME= [C59B9B20:01C97296] 14, 25 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 14, 25 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n09KDquJ008557 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
-- ************************************************************* Note: The information contained in this message may be privileged and confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Thank you, The Lincoln Electric Company **************************************************************
==============================Original Headers============================== 38, 24 -- From frank_karl-at-lincolnelectric.com Fri Jan 9 14:31:19 2009 38, 24 -- Received: from lincolnelectric.com (smtp1.lincolnelectric.com [64.109.211.114]) 38, 24 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09KVJT7000814 38, 24 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:31:19 -0600 38, 24 -- In-Reply-To: {200901092021.n09KLUr1031349-at-ns.microscopy.com} 38, 24 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters only 38, 24 -- To: DusevichV-at-umkc.edu, Microscopy-at-microscopy.com 38, 24 -- X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 6.5.4 March 27, 2005 38, 24 -- Message-ID: {OFE5145C76.CBE47B69-ON85257539.00708B12-85257539.0070B254-at-lincolnelectric.com} 38, 24 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:31:02 -0500 38, 24 -- From: Frank_Karl-at-lincolnelectric.com 38, 24 -- X-MIMETrack: CD-MIME by Router on Notescom1/Lincoln Electric/US(Release 8.0.1|February 38, 24 -- 07, 2008) at 01/09/2009 03:31:04 PM, 38, 24 -- CD-MIME complete at 01/09/2009 03:31:04 PM, 38, 24 -- Itemize by Router on Notescom1/Lincoln Electric/US(Release 8.0.1|February 38, 24 -- 07, 2008) at 01/09/2009 03:31:04 PM, 38, 24 -- Serialize by Router on Notescom1/Lincoln Electric/US(Release 8.0.1|February 38, 24 -- 07, 2008) at 01/09/2009 03:31:04 PM, 38, 24 -- Serialize complete at 01/09/2009 03:31:04 PM 38, 24 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 38, 24 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 38, 24 -- charset="UTF-8" 38, 24 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 38, 24 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n09KVJT7000814 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
There is no compelling reason to use cacodylate buffers for an introductory class. If you need to add calcium to the fix you can use HEPES or PIPES, plenty of literature on these. Cacodylate was very convenient because it was a one salt buffer and Ca ions did not precipitate. Hazardous waste disposal concerns have made its use difficult to justify.
Geoff
kamlennon-at-yahoo.com wrote: } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } Hello Again Listers, } } Thanks to all of you who have responded to my recent query. I'm sure that I will have more as time passes, and I appreciate the fantastic response that I've had from the list. } } Since we are on the topic of the dangers of EM work (the uranyl acetate thread), I have a question about cacodylate buffer. I'm getting set to teach an introductory EM course for biologists to undergraduates. Having interviewed two of my three students during the previous semester, I know that I will be starting very much at zero. They had no to little knowledge of what "EM" is or can be used for before I spoke with them - they are exploring this new class. My plan is to take them through the preparation of plant, animal, and some sort of micro sample via traditional chemical fixation methods and keep it as simple as possible. I am inclined to steer clear of cacodylate buffer due to its toxicity and because they have enough to deal with already, and stick with phosphate buffer. However, I have noticed that most if not all of the animal tissue protocols I've been perusing use cac buffer. Is there any reason why I should keep it in the protocol? } } Thanks for your advice. } Kristen } } Kristen A. Lennon, Ph.D. } Lecturer, Department of Biology } 202 Compton Science Center } Frostburg State University } 101 Braddock Road } Frostburg, MD 21532 } } k.lennon-at-frostburg.edu } } } } } ==============================Original Headers============================== } 7, 20 -- From kamlennon-at-yahoo.com Fri Jan 9 13:57:15 2009 } 7, 20 -- Received: from web84004.mail.mud.yahoo.com (web84004.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.206.174]) } 7, 20 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with SMTP id n09JvEx0012745 } 7, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 13:57:14 -0600 } 7, 20 -- Received: (qmail 76571 invoked by uid 60001); 9 Jan 2009 19:57:14 -0000 } 7, 20 -- DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; } 7, 20 -- s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; } 7, 20 -- h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID; } 7, 20 -- b=xeLr+fOkc5vJ3EXto1Y6+o7SUjRsZmyWr021p/AR8+eZSkJdh5uAKRIqv7XOXlDD/DxqNcT7zKQfKkLZ8xb+qim3FguZ95OneP3PcPPuzZm7XdHTVOeaRk/Onkfmz9gH67KG3edVJa6kzqjAXn/Wmi6J6hcnTSKOM2Iqc98V+Tg=; } 7, 20 -- X-YMail-OSG: LFU8udYVM1kiLkk70s8A_YJn70xTwWxw7CGSMeW3AL1T.rnd4LZsOXO_lJUYOJekMg-- } 7, 20 -- Received: from [96.239.149.81] by web84004.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 09 Jan 2009 11:57:13 PST } 7, 20 -- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.7.260.1 } 7, 20 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:57:13 -0800 (PST) } 7, 20 -- From: Kristen Lennon {kamlennon-at-yahoo.com} } 7, 20 -- Reply-To: kamlennon-at-yahoo.com } 7, 20 -- Subject: Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? } 7, 20 -- To: Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com } 7, 20 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 } 7, 20 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii } 7, 20 -- Message-ID: {982974.76126.qm-at-web84004.mail.mud.yahoo.com} } ==============================End of - Headers============================== } } }
-- -- ********************************************** Geoff McAuliffe, Ph.D. Neuroscience and Cell Biology Robert Wood Johnson Medical School 675 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08854 voice: (732)-235-4583 mcauliff-at-umdnj.edu **********************************************
==============================Original Headers============================== 9, 28 -- From mcauliff-at-umdnj.edu Fri Jan 9 14:32:36 2009 9, 28 -- Received: from zix04.umdnj.edu (zix04.UMDNJ.EDU [130.219.34.127]) 9, 28 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with SMTP id n09KWaoa003266 9, 28 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:32:36 -0600 9, 28 -- Received: from zix04.umdnj.edu (ZixVPM [127.0.0.1]) 9, 28 -- by Outbound.umdnj.edu (Proprietary) with ESMTP id 80F2F4C05F 9, 28 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:32:35 -0500 (EST) 9, 28 -- Received: from umdnj.edu (unknown [10.32.15.102]) 9, 28 -- by zix04.umdnj.edu (Proprietary) with ESMTP id 1757550C155 9, 28 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:20:18 -0500 (EST) 9, 28 -- Received: from ([10.32.15.167]) 9, 28 -- by imail2.umdnj.edu with ESMTP id CVSJWG1.4223090; 9, 28 -- Fri, 09 Jan 2009 15:20:15 -0500 9, 28 -- MIME-version: 1.0 9, 28 -- Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT 9, 28 -- Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed 9, 28 -- Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([10.32.15.102]) 9, 28 -- by umduwc01.umdnj.edu (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-6.03 (built 9, 28 -- Mar 14 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTP id {0KD800F280HR8880-at-umduwc01.umdnj.edu} for 9, 28 -- microscopy-at-microscopy.com; Fri, 09 Jan 2009 15:20:15 -0500 (EST) 9, 28 -- Message-id: {4967B1C9.50300-at-umdnj.edu} 9, 28 -- Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 15:21:29 -0500 9, 28 -- From: Geoff McAuliffe {mcauliff-at-umdnj.edu} 9, 28 -- User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (Windows/20081209) 9, 28 -- To: kamlennon-at-yahoo.com, microscopy-at-microscopy.com 9, 28 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? 9, 28 -- References: {200901091958.n09Jw4H3015451-at-ns.microscopy.com} 9, 28 -- In-reply-to: {200901091958.n09Jw4H3015451-at-ns.microscopy.com} ==============================End of - Headers==============================
I have always found it strange that there is so much concern about the use of cacodylate in the EM laboratory. I concede that it is dangerous when handled incorrectly. However, I would think that phosphate buffer containing 2.5% glutaraldehyde is more dangerous, or even a 2% aqueous solution of osmium tetroxide. At what point should students start taking responsibility for handling chemicals safely and when do the trainers bite the bullet and make sure the training is adequate?
During my training I remember very clearly how I was taught how to handle pathogenic bacteria and viruses. The instructions were very clear and very strict, and followed the same basic rules of how I was trained to handle radioactive material. Basically the instructions were that these agents can make you sick and even kill you if you don't follow my instructions, so you have to handle them as follows....
When I moved into electron microscopy, the training I was given to prepare biological specimens consisted of being given access to a fridge full of chemicals and a written protocol. The brown spots on my hands appeared after a couple of hours but my corneas clouded over in about 30 min of my using the osmium tetroxide. I had been left completely unsupervised to handle these chemicals without any prior warning of their dangers. Interestingly, when my supervisor found out about my use of the osmium tetroxide, and what it had done to me, he blamed me!
With proper training, the chemicals we use in the EM lab are basically very safe. We use small amounts of them and store them in closed cabinets so they should not affect our health in any way.
Part of a good laboratory training course is teaching users how to handle toxic chemicals and how to pipette solutions without creating aerosols. Making sure that protective gloves are used correctly is another important aspect of this training.
If we train correctly, then it should be sufficient to warn students that they are handling materials designed to chemically alter biological material. At this point, I usually remind them that they are made of biological material too.
Happy New Year (My New Years Resolution is very high!)
Best regards,
Paul Webster.
Paul Webster, Ph.D House Ear Institute 2100 West Third Street Los Angeles, CA 90057 (213) 273 8026 pwebster-at-hei.org
==============================Original Headers============================== 16, 18 -- From PWebster-at-hei.org Fri Jan 9 14:45:35 2009 16, 18 -- Received: from hi0sml1.hei.org (heimail.hei.org [12.88.48.54] (may be forged)) 16, 18 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09KjYwS028110 16, 18 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:45:35 -0600 16, 18 -- Received: from 10.10.42.117 ([10.10.42.117]) by hi0sml1.hei.org ([10.10.40.106]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; 16, 18 -- Fri, 9 Jan 2009 20:45:34 +0000 16, 18 -- User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.15.0.081119 16, 18 -- Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 12:45:30 -0800 16, 18 -- Subject: Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? 16, 18 -- From: "Webster, Paul" {PWebster-at-hei.org} 16, 18 -- To: {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} 16, 18 -- Message-ID: {C58CF76A.1FB48%PWebster-at-hei.org} 16, 18 -- Thread-Topic: Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? 16, 18 -- Thread-Index: AclymzWCIWUJgAPwQOO74u5GyMglfw== 16, 18 -- Mime-version: 1.0 16, 18 -- Content-type: text/plain; 16, 18 -- charset="US-ASCII" 16, 18 -- Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit ==============================End of - Headers==============================
I naturally agree with Paul that with proper training that all the chemicals used in an EM are safe but that doesn't make it a good idea to use them indiscriminately. The comparison to bacteria and viruses is a red herring since those are typically the subject of interest as opposed to the selection of a buffer which is discretionary. Microscopists and other scientists inevitably generate hazardous waste but it is incumbent on us not to do so unless there is a scientific reason that it is the only way to do the experiment.
It is true that glutaraldehyde in phosphate buffer is dangerous. But glutaraldehyde in cacodylate buffer is more dangerous. Accidental exposure would mean exposure to two dangerous chemicals. In addition, adding acid to glutaraldehyde in phosphate will change the pH but not release arsenic gas. Many studies have shown the Good buffers to be suitable for LM and EM studies. I see no reason for any microscopist to cling to the use of cacodylate.
Paul's own horror story of poor training and supervision is further evidence of why one should minimize all unnecessary risks. I doubt any trained scientist would any chemical they don't fully understand outside of the hood and without gloves - that's a beginner's mistake. Unless one can guarantee being present at every step of a new student's processing, it would only be prudent to use the least toxic formulations. With experience, those students will be able to judge the risks they wish to take.
Thomas E. Phillips, Ph.D Professor of Biological Sciences Chair, MU Faculty Council Director, Molecular Cytology Core 2 Tucker Hall University of Missouri Columbia, MO 65211-7400 573-882-4712 (office) 573-882-0123 (fax) phillipst-at-missouri.edu
-----Original Message----- X-from: PWebster-at-hei.org [mailto:PWebster-at-hei.org] Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 2:46 PM To: Phillips, Thomas E.
Dear All,
I have always found it strange that there is so much concern about the use of cacodylate in the EM laboratory. I concede that it is dangerous when handled incorrectly. However, I would think that phosphate buffer containing 2.5% glutaraldehyde is more dangerous, or even a 2% aqueous solution of osmium tetroxide. At what point should students start taking responsibility for handling chemicals safely and when do the trainers bite the bullet and make sure the training is adequate?
During my training I remember very clearly how I was taught how to handle pathogenic bacteria and viruses. The instructions were very clear and very strict, and followed the same basic rules of how I was trained to handle radioactive material. Basically the instructions were that these agents can make you sick and even kill you if you don't follow my instructions, so you have to handle them as follows....
When I moved into electron microscopy, the training I was given to prepare biological specimens consisted of being given access to a fridge full of chemicals and a written protocol. The brown spots on my hands appeared after a couple of hours but my corneas clouded over in about 30 min of my using the osmium tetroxide. I had been left completely unsupervised to handle these chemicals without any prior warning of their dangers. Interestingly, when my supervisor found out about my use of the osmium tetroxide, and what it had done to me, he blamed me!
With proper training, the chemicals we use in the EM lab are basically very safe. We use small amounts of them and store them in closed cabinets so they should not affect our health in any way.
Part of a good laboratory training course is teaching users how to handle toxic chemicals and how to pipette solutions without creating aerosols. Making sure that protective gloves are used correctly is another important aspect of this training.
If we train correctly, then it should be sufficient to warn students that they are handling materials designed to chemically alter biological material. At this point, I usually remind them that they are made of biological material too.
Happy New Year (My New Years Resolution is very high!)
Best regards,
Paul Webster.
Paul Webster, Ph.D House Ear Institute 2100 West Third Street Los Angeles, CA 90057 (213) 273 8026 pwebster-at-hei.org
==============================Original Headers============================== 16, 18 -- From PWebster-at-hei.org Fri Jan 9 14:45:35 2009 16, 18 -- Received: from hi0sml1.hei.org (heimail.hei.org [12.88.48.54] (may be forged)) 16, 18 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09KjYwS028110 16, 18 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:45:35 -0600 16, 18 -- Received: from 10.10.42.117 ([10.10.42.117]) by hi0sml1.hei.org ([10.10.40.106]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; 16, 18 -- Fri, 9 Jan 2009 20:45:34 +0000 16, 18 -- User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.15.0.081119 16, 18 -- Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 12:45:30 -0800 16, 18 -- Subject: Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? 16, 18 -- From: "Webster, Paul" {PWebster-at-hei.org} 16, 18 -- To: {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} 16, 18 -- Message-ID: {C58CF76A.1FB48%PWebster-at-hei.org} 16, 18 -- Thread-Topic: Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? 16, 18 -- Thread-Index: AclymzWCIWUJgAPwQOO74u5GyMglfw== 16, 18 -- Mime-version: 1.0 16, 18 -- Content-type: text/plain; 16, 18 -- charset="US-ASCII" 16, 18 -- Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit ==============================End of - Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 29, 29 -- From PhillipsT-at-missouri.edu Fri Jan 9 15:18:40 2009 29, 29 -- Received: from mxtip01-umsystem-out.um.umsystem.edu (mxtip01-umsystem-out.um.umsystem.edu [209.106.229.49]) 29, 29 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09LIdVT010691 29, 29 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:18:39 -0600 29, 29 -- X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true 29, 29 -- X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAGhNZ0nRauUp/2dsb2JhbADFJQEJhTmFVQGEP4Ev 29, 29 -- Received: from unknown (HELO um-nsmtpout1.um.umsystem.edu) ([209.106.229.41]) 29, 29 -- by mxtip01-mizzou-out.um.umsystem.edu with ESMTP; 09 Jan 2009 15:18:38 -0600 29, 29 -- Received: from UM-XMAIL06.um.umsystem.edu ([209.106.228.32]) by um-nsmtpout1.um.umsystem.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); 29, 29 -- Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:18:38 -0600 29, 29 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 29, 29 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message 29, 29 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 29, 29 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 29, 29 -- charset="us-ascii" 29, 29 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? 29, 29 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:18:37 -0600 29, 29 -- Message-ID: {0510DC719E56F64BB2AD84EE64CE6BAD05BBD640-at-UM-XMAIL06.um.umsystem.edu} 29, 29 -- In-Reply-To: {200901092046.n09KkNk7029228-at-ns.microscopy.com} 29, 29 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: 29, 29 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 29, 29 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? 29, 29 -- thread-index: Aclym1aIby1FKakIQ163EmL7rOr/aAAArzOQ 29, 29 -- References: {200901092046.n09KkNk7029228-at-ns.microscopy.com} 29, 29 -- From: "Phillips, Thomas E." {PhillipsT-at-missouri.edu} 29, 29 -- To: {PWebster-at-hei.org} , {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 29, 29 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 09 Jan 2009 21:18:38.0694 (UTC) FILETIME=[D6DCF060:01C9729F] 29, 29 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 29, 29 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n09LIdVT010691 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
I disagree with the assumption that depleted uranium (DU) is not radioactive and the implication by the word "depleted" that all the radioactivity has been removed. Here's why.
I had 12 pounds of depleted UAc and a calibrated and certified "pancake" Geiger counter detector. It had no problem detecting background cosmic radiation and it had an up to date certification sticker on it. That amount of DUAc in those containers pegged my Geiger counter from three feet away. The one pound bottles were brown glass bottles, inside a plastic bag, inside a "tin" shipping can, and had labels that said, "(depleted uranium)" on them. So the counted radiation had to be gamma but U does not emit gamma radiation.
It is the impurities from the decay of U that generate the gamma emitters. I have no doubt that some of the posters think their materials are not radioactive and their supplier's material may not be. So we now have two schools of thought. It's not radioactive and there is radioactivity present. The only way to know for sure what you have and get a hint of the history of the manufacturing, is to take a reading on the purchased DUAc salt with a good quality Geiger counter and see what you get for a reading. My EH&S and safety people were totally shocked at the DUAc readings and said, "But this was made from depleted uranium. It's not radioactive." I relied, "Looks pretty radioactive to me." Like me, they believed the Geiger counter readings and not the MSDS sheets that didn't address the gamma emitting impurities, i.e. the amount of impurities from decay.
IMO, the phrase 'depleted uranium' is misleading. There is a shipping exemption on this radioactive material, I was told. If the amount is one ounce or less, you don't have to label it or ship it as radioactive. My shipping clerk refused to ship any amount. So just because the bottle or packaging you received does not say "radioactive material", that does not mean small amounts are not radioactive. I think that's where the EM myth of not being radioactive might comes in. How do you know every last U-235 atom was removed and the uranium was zone refined and/or chemically purified? You don't. It doesn't say any of that on the bottle(s). Just measure the gamma radiation.
Paul Beauregard Senior Research Associate
At 06:20 PM 1/8/09 -0600, you wrote: } } } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America
==============================Original Headers============================== 8, 28 -- From beaurega-at-westol.com Fri Jan 9 15:27:19 2009 8, 28 -- Received: from smtp-gateway-6.winbeam.com (smtp-gateway-6.winbeam.com [64.84.96.16]) 8, 28 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09LRJTJ024332 8, 28 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:27:19 -0600 8, 28 -- Received: from mail.winbeam.com (mail.winbeam.com [64.84.96.10]) 8, 28 -- by smtp-gateway-6.winbeam.com (8.13.1/8.12.8) with SMTP id n09LREO4007130 8, 28 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 16:27:15 -0500 8, 28 -- Received: (qmail 9427 invoked by uid 89); 9 Jan 2009 21:27:08 -0000 8, 28 -- Received: from pitts-69-72-21-71.dynamic-dialup.coretel.net (HELO running) (69.72.21.71) 8, 28 -- by mail.winbeam.com with SMTP; 9 Jan 2009 21:27:08 -0000 8, 28 -- Message-Id: {3.0.6.32.20090109162749.00893c10-at-pop3.norton.antivirus} 8, 28 -- X-Sender: beaurega/mail.westol.com-at-pop3.norton.antivirus 8, 28 -- X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) 8, 28 -- Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 16:27:49 -0500 8, 28 -- To: microscopy-at-microscopy.com 8, 28 -- From: Beaurega {beaurega-at-westol.com} 8, 28 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters 8, 28 -- only 8, 28 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 8, 28 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 8, 28 -- X-Winbeam-MailScanner-Information: Winbeam - Please contact Technical Support for more information 8, 28 -- X-Winbeam-MailScanner-ID: n09LREO4007130 8, 28 -- X-Winbeam-MailScanner: Found to be clean Winbeam (courtesy of MailScanner) 8, 28 -- X-Winbeam-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam (whitelisted), 8, 28 -- SpamAssassin (not cached, score=-1.9, required 4, autolearn=not spam, 8, 28 -- AWL 0.10, BAYES_00 -2.00) 8, 28 -- X-Winbeam-MailScanner-From: beaurega-at-westol.com 8, 28 -- X-Winbeam-MailScanner-Watermark: 1232141236.05045-at-/cuIVPDK8713eRRY8mXR4w ==============================End of - Headers==============================
In our introductory and advanced courses we used phosphate buffers for animal tissue. My classmates and I all got knock-you-dead micrographs, better than the ones in our textbooks, of liver, kidney, muscle, brain, gills, lung, and etc., using phosphate buffers, so I think they can be used with animal tissue to obtain good results.
We're required to read the MSDS before using a chemical, and we're tested throughout both semesters on the safe handling of all EM chemicals, on ALL tests, even chemicals we don't used, from day one in lab.
On our first project, first semester, advanced students handled the OsO4 for us, and we made only the buffers and resins. Later in that semester we were handling and even preparing OsO4, and other chemicals, when we needed more or different concentrations, and if our teacher thought we could do so safely.
For our individual projects, later on, we can use the chemical fixation protocol of our choice--we write these up and submit them weeks before the project.
I used cacodylate buffer for my final project for my advanced biological EM course, and it had to be made from scratch. I worked with a partner, and we used a lab area when other students were absent, and had proper changes of gloves, fume hoods and scale arrangements that would not aerosolize anything, clean tools ready to limit handling time, etc., etc. We figured out the logistics and safe handling by ourselves from experience, questions, and the MSDS's.
We also had a great teacher who watched us like hawks before allowing us to mix our own chemicals and told us right away if we handled something incorrectly. Also, we watch and correct each other before our teacher gets the chance. Lab accidents caused by carelessness are a huge waste of time.
Kleo Pullin
--- On Fri, 1/9/09, kamlennon-at-yahoo.com {kamlennon-at-yahoo.com} wrote:
} From: kamlennon-at-yahoo.com {kamlennon-at-yahoo.com} } Subject: [Microscopy] Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? } To: KLeoPullin-at-pacbell.net } Date: Friday, January 9, 2009, 12:01 PM } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy } Society of America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } Hello Again Listers, } } Thanks to all of you who have responded to my recent query. } I'm sure that I will have more as time passes, and I } appreciate the fantastic response that I've had from the } list. } } Since we are on the topic of the dangers of EM work (the } uranyl acetate thread), I have a question about cacodylate } buffer. I'm getting set to teach an introductory EM } course for biologists to undergraduates. Having interviewed } two of my three students during the previous semester, I } know that I will be starting very much at zero. They had no } to little knowledge of what "EM" is or can be used } for before I spoke with them - they are exploring this new } class. My plan is to take them through the preparation of } plant, animal, and some sort of micro sample via traditional } chemical fixation methods and keep it as simple as possible. } I am inclined to steer clear of cacodylate buffer due to its } toxicity and because they have enough to deal with already, } and stick with phosphate buffer. However, I have noticed } that most if not all of the animal tissue protocols I've } been perusing use cac buffer. Is there any reason why I } should keep it in the protocol? } } Thanks for your advice. } Kristen } } Kristen A. Lennon, Ph.D. } Lecturer, Department of Biology } 202 Compton Science Center } Frostburg State University } 101 Braddock Road } Frostburg, MD 21532 } } k.lennon-at-frostburg.edu } } } } } ==============================Original } Headers============================== } 7, 20 -- From kamlennon-at-yahoo.com Fri Jan 9 13:57:15 2009 } 7, 20 -- Received: from web84004.mail.mud.yahoo.com } (web84004.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.206.174]) } 7, 20 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) } with SMTP id n09JvEx0012745 } 7, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Fri, 9 Jan } 2009 13:57:14 -0600 } 7, 20 -- Received: (qmail 76571 invoked by uid 60001); 9 } Jan 2009 19:57:14 -0000 } 7, 20 -- DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; } 7, 20 -- s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; } 7, 20 -- } h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID; } 7, 20 -- } b=xeLr+fOkc5vJ3EXto1Y6+o7SUjRsZmyWr021p/AR8+eZSkJdh5uAKRIqv7XOXlDD/DxqNcT7zKQfKkLZ8xb+qim3FguZ95OneP3PcPPuzZm7XdHTVOeaRk/Onkfmz9gH67KG3edVJa6kzqjAXn/Wmi6J6hcnTSKOM2Iqc98V+Tg=; } 7, 20 -- X-YMail-OSG: } LFU8udYVM1kiLkk70s8A_YJn70xTwWxw7CGSMeW3AL1T.rnd4LZsOXO_lJUYOJekMg-- } 7, 20 -- Received: from [96.239.149.81] by } web84004.mail.mud.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 09 Jan 2009 } 11:57:13 PST } 7, 20 -- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.7.260.1 } 7, 20 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 11:57:13 -0800 (PST) } 7, 20 -- From: Kristen Lennon {kamlennon-at-yahoo.com} } 7, 20 -- Reply-To: kamlennon-at-yahoo.com } 7, 20 -- Subject: Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? } 7, 20 -- To: Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com } 7, 20 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 } 7, 20 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii } 7, 20 -- Message-ID: } {982974.76126.qm-at-web84004.mail.mud.yahoo.com} } ==============================End of - } Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 14, 20 -- From kleopullin-at-pacbell.net Fri Jan 9 15:52:21 2009 14, 20 -- Received: from web83405.mail.sp1.yahoo.com (web83405.mail.sp1.yahoo.com [69.147.64.53]) 14, 20 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with SMTP id n09LqKsh006024 14, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:52:21 -0600 14, 20 -- Received: (qmail 85987 invoked by uid 60001); 9 Jan 2009 21:52:20 -0000 14, 20 -- DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; 14, 20 -- s=s1024; d=pacbell.net; 14, 20 -- h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID; 14, 20 -- b=6BGoEGZRiX+t35SsP/ZxdZwTKRcM/eFcrmMo1JyjALCkBsHqApT/5EZqJzjEZ5bCkyUsAPnUQiqztd2oHD+tITdKvXJOC5qBOOgAtzmogoO98XYNlm/vllX758+/6+v2picHm9h4SmFHDJVat4W9mbouXg6062oJnZOz2XHrmdI=; 14, 20 -- X-YMail-OSG: NdCCuD0VM1nODQ9p9gMVoVEdgF8YuA4Qjrm0TyceSJkdBxPoCeIqdeKIThmPxEhjBwfDH6WqSjV1gUcfyJ8GELMxiyC5xnNnEEKy.Oi_ywwTH5Kv92APyUsfSttvFbaPUeoaEqeZqghE8nvhJ0MxbZz9LbFZ4UuQsP_Kmh1pJOQq4F3zj28o_vhDTlka 14, 20 -- Received: from [69.225.11.246] by web83405.mail.sp1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Fri, 09 Jan 2009 13:52:20 PST 14, 20 -- X-Mailer: YahooMailWebService/0.7.218.2 14, 20 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 13:52:20 -0800 (PST) 14, 20 -- From: Kleo Pullin {kleopullin-at-pacbell.net} 14, 20 -- Reply-To: kleopullin-at-pacbell.net 14, 20 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? 14, 20 -- To: Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com 14, 20 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 14, 20 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii 14, 20 -- Message-ID: {479577.85874.qm-at-web83405.mail.sp1.yahoo.com} ==============================End of - Headers==============================
On Jan 9, 2009, at 1:27 PM, beaurega-at-westol.com wrote:
} I disagree with the assumption that depleted uranium (DU) is not } radioactive and the implication by the word "depleted" that all the } radioactivity has been removed.
Dear Paul, Depleted U is natural U from which almost all U235 has been removed. Just because U238 does not sustain a fission chain reaction does not mean that it is not radioactive. I would refer anyone who believes that U238 is not radioactive to any book or web site where radioactivity is discussed, or, as you say "Just measure the gamma radiation." Yours, Bill Tivol, PhD EM Scientist Ultrafast EM Facility Noyes Laboratory, MC 127-72 California Institute of Technology Pasadena CA 91125 (626) 395-8833 tivol-at-caltech.edu
==============================Original Headers============================== 6, 22 -- From tivol-at-caltech.edu Fri Jan 9 16:14:35 2009 6, 22 -- Received: from outgoing-mail.its.caltech.edu (outgoing-mail.its.caltech.edu [131.215.239.19]) 6, 22 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09MEZVe021473 6, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 16:14:35 -0600 6, 22 -- Received: from fire-doxen.imss.caltech.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) 6, 22 -- by fire-doxen-postvirus (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36AD9328B97 6, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:14:35 -0800 (PST) 6, 22 -- X-Spam-Scanned: at Caltech-IMSS on fire-doxen by amavisd-new 6, 22 -- Received: from DHCP-19-146.caltech.edu (DHCP-19-146.caltech.edu [131.215.19.146]) 6, 22 -- by fire-doxen-ssl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40540328DC7 6, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:14:34 -0800 (PST) 6, 22 -- Message-Id: {ADAF5D19-031F-46B8-AA19-007568467A9C-at-caltech.edu} 6, 22 -- From: Bill Tivol {tivol-at-caltech.edu} 6, 22 -- To: microscopy-at-microscopy.com 6, 22 -- In-Reply-To: {200901092127.n09LRPfo024462-at-ns.microscopy.com} 6, 22 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes 6, 22 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 6, 22 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) 6, 22 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] Re: viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters 6, 22 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 14:14:33 -0800 6, 22 -- References: {200901092127.n09LRPfo024462-at-ns.microscopy.com} 6, 22 -- X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) ==============================End of - Headers==============================
My message about cacodylate was aimed at stimulating a continuation of this discussion, not to advocate the use of cacodylate buffer. However, the toxicity of the compound should not be the only reason for not choosing to use it. The choice of buffer will also depend on the end result needed.
My point in the first message was to point out that with proper training it is possible to handle almost any of the chemicals we encounter in a safe way.
One important caveat that I would add about using phosphate buffer in the primary fixative is that when mixed with glutaraldehyde and osmium tetroxide it can form a fine precipitate in the cells.
If using phosphate buffer, and there are plenty of historical references where it was used successfully for TEM, make sure the cells or tissues are washed well after glutaraldehyde fixation and before immersion in osmium tetroxide.
The choice of buffers for EM is another subject that deserves a long discussion thread. Tom Phillips suggests the use of Good buffers as an alternative to cacodylate. However, PIPES and HEPES will preserve tissues and cells in very different ways when compared with each other, as well as with cacodylate or phosphate buffers. This is partially due to the amount of extraction that occurs. In addition, PIPES buffer is often used at a pH where it has almost no buffering capacity, HEPES can preserve tissues so well that there is almost no extraction of cellular material, which results in virtually no specimen contrast and TRIS buffer may not work at all due to its ability to react with the aldehyde. In the end, fixation recipe changes should be approached with some caution.
Best regards,
Paul.
Paul Webster, Ph.D House Ear Institute 2100 West Third Street Los Angeles, CA 90057 (213) 273 8026 pwebster-at-hei.org
} From: "Phillips, Thomas E." {PhillipsT-at-missouri.edu} } Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:18:37 -0600 } To: Paul Webster {PWebster-at-hei.org} , {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} } Subject: RE: [Microscopy] Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? } } I naturally agree with Paul that with proper training that all the } chemicals used in an EM are safe but that doesn't make it a good idea to } use them indiscriminately. The comparison to bacteria and viruses is a } red herring since those are typically the subject of interest as opposed } to the selection of a buffer which is discretionary. Microscopists and } other scientists inevitably generate hazardous waste but it is incumbent } on us not to do so unless there is a scientific reason that it is the } only way to do the experiment. } } It is true that glutaraldehyde in phosphate buffer is dangerous. But } glutaraldehyde in cacodylate buffer is more dangerous. Accidental } exposure would mean exposure to two dangerous chemicals. In addition, } adding acid to glutaraldehyde in phosphate will change the pH but not } release arsenic gas. Many studies have shown the Good buffers to be } suitable for LM and EM studies. I see no reason for any microscopist to } cling to the use of cacodylate. } } Paul's own horror story of poor training and supervision is further } evidence of why one should minimize all unnecessary risks. I doubt any } trained scientist would any chemical they don't fully understand outside } of the hood and without gloves - that's a beginner's mistake. Unless one } can guarantee being present at every step of a new student's processing, } it would only be prudent to use the least toxic formulations. With } experience, those students will be able to judge the risks they wish to } take. } } } Thomas E. Phillips, Ph.D } Professor of Biological Sciences } Chair, MU Faculty Council } Director, Molecular Cytology Core } 2 Tucker Hall } University of Missouri } Columbia, MO 65211-7400 } 573-882-4712 (office) } 573-882-0123 (fax) } phillipst-at-missouri.edu } } http://www.biology.missouri.edu/faculty/phillips.html } http://www.biotech.missouri.edu/mcc/ } } -----Original Message----- } From: PWebster-at-hei.org [mailto:PWebster-at-hei.org] } Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 2:46 PM } To: Phillips, Thomas E. } Subject: [Microscopy] Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? } } } } } ------------------------------------------------------------------------ } ---- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of } America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ------------------------------------------------------------------------ } ---- } } Dear All, } } I have always found it strange that there is so much concern about the } use } of cacodylate in the EM laboratory. I concede that it is dangerous when } handled incorrectly. However, I would think that phosphate buffer } containing } 2.5% glutaraldehyde is more dangerous, or even a 2% aqueous solution of } osmium tetroxide. At what point should students start taking } responsibility } for handling chemicals safely and when do the trainers bite the bullet } and } make sure the training is adequate? } } During my training I remember very clearly how I was taught how to } handle } pathogenic bacteria and viruses. The instructions were very clear and } very } strict, and followed the same basic rules of how I was trained to handle } radioactive material. Basically the instructions were that these agents } can } make you sick and even kill you if you don't follow my instructions, so } you } have to handle them as follows.... } } When I moved into electron microscopy, the training I was given to } prepare } biological specimens consisted of being given access to a fridge full of } chemicals and a written protocol. The brown spots on my hands appeared } after } a couple of hours but my corneas clouded over in about 30 min of my } using } the osmium tetroxide. I had been left completely unsupervised to handle } these chemicals without any prior warning of their dangers. } Interestingly, } when my supervisor found out about my use of the osmium tetroxide, and } what } it had done to me, he blamed me! } } With proper training, the chemicals we use in the EM lab are basically } very } safe. We use small amounts of them and store them in closed cabinets so } they } should not affect our health in any way. } } Part of a good laboratory training course is teaching users how to } handle } toxic chemicals and how to pipette solutions without creating aerosols. } Making sure that protective gloves are used correctly is another } important } aspect of this training. } } If we train correctly, then it should be sufficient to warn students } that } they are handling materials designed to chemically alter biological } material. At this point, I usually remind them that they are made of } biological material too. } } Happy New Year } (My New Years Resolution is very high!) } } Best regards, } } Paul Webster. } } Paul Webster, Ph.D } House Ear Institute } 2100 West Third Street } Los Angeles, CA 90057 } (213) 273 8026 } pwebster-at-hei.org } } } } } } } } ==============================Original } Headers============================== } 16, 18 -- From PWebster-at-hei.org Fri Jan 9 14:45:35 2009 } 16, 18 -- Received: from hi0sml1.hei.org (heimail.hei.org [12.88.48.54] } (may be forged)) } 16, 18 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with } ESMTP id n09KjYwS028110 } 16, 18 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 } 14:45:35 -0600 } 16, 18 -- Received: from 10.10.42.117 ([10.10.42.117]) by } hi0sml1.hei.org ([10.10.40.106]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV } ; } 16, 18 -- Fri, 9 Jan 2009 20:45:34 +0000 } 16, 18 -- User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.15.0.081119 } 16, 18 -- Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 12:45:30 -0800 } 16, 18 -- Subject: Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? } 16, 18 -- From: "Webster, Paul" {PWebster-at-hei.org} } 16, 18 -- To: {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} } 16, 18 -- Message-ID: {C58CF76A.1FB48%PWebster-at-hei.org} } 16, 18 -- Thread-Topic: Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? } 16, 18 -- Thread-Index: AclymzWCIWUJgAPwQOO74u5GyMglfw== } 16, 18 -- Mime-version: 1.0 } 16, 18 -- Content-type: text/plain; } 16, 18 -- charset="US-ASCII" } 16, 18 -- Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit } ==============================End of - } Headers============================== }
==============================Original Headers============================== 12, 20 -- From PWebster-at-hei.org Fri Jan 9 17:15:16 2009 12, 20 -- Received: from hi0sml1.hei.org (heimail.hei.org [12.88.48.54] (may be forged)) 12, 20 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09NFGaA004403 12, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 17:15:16 -0600 12, 20 -- Received: from 10.10.42.117 ([10.10.42.117]) by hi0sml1.hei.org ([10.10.40.106]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; 12, 20 -- Fri, 9 Jan 2009 23:15:15 +0000 12, 20 -- User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.15.0.081119 12, 20 -- Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 15:15:11 -0800 12, 20 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? 12, 20 -- From: "Webster, Paul" {PWebster-at-hei.org} 12, 20 -- To: "Phillips, Thomas E." {PhillipsT-at-missouri.edu} , 12, 20 -- {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 12, 20 -- Message-ID: {C58D1A7F.1FB70%PWebster-at-hei.org} 12, 20 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? 12, 20 -- Thread-Index: Aclym1aIby1FKakIQ163EmL7rOr/aAAArzOQAASC0Ww= 12, 20 -- In-Reply-To: {0510DC719E56F64BB2AD84EE64CE6BAD05BBD640-at-UM-XMAIL06.um.umsystem.edu} 12, 20 -- Mime-version: 1.0 12, 20 -- Content-type: text/plain; 12, 20 -- charset="US-ASCII" 12, 20 -- Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit ==============================End of - Headers==============================
PIPES has a pKa of 6.8 which would make it a suitable buffer for 6.3 - 7.3 (and since aldehydes fixation tends to acidify the solution, it would be good at 7.4 also!). Cacodylate has a pKa of 6.2. I guess it depends on what pH you are using for your aldehydes fix but most people use something closer to 7 so I don't see how PIPES pKa is inferior to cacodylate.
Thomas E. Phillips, Ph.D Professor of Biological Sciences Chair, MU Faculty Council Director, Molecular Cytology Core 2 Tucker Hall University of Missouri Columbia, MO 65211-7400 573-882-4712 (office) 573-882-0123 (fax) phillipst-at-missouri.edu
-----Original Message----- X-from: Webster, Paul [mailto:PWebster-at-hei.org] Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 5:15 PM To: Phillips, Thomas E.; Microscopy-at-microscopy.com
This Question/Comment was submitted to the Microscopy Listserver using the WWW based Form at http://microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/MLFormMail.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember this posting is most likely not from a Subscriber, so when replying please copy both rp_seifi-at-yahoo.com as well as the MIcroscopy Listserver ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: rp_seifi-at-yahoo.com Name: Reza Pourseify
Organization: Mehr Inst.
Title-Subject: [Filtered] FISH
Question: Hello everybody I have a problem in my microscope setting. The line of light is biased to lefthand side in it for some zoom degrees. How can i correct it. It is a Nikon, E600 (fluorescence microscope with visible light harware and a condenser) Thank you for attention...
One last time - I am not advocating the use of cacodylate and I do agree that cacodylate as generally used in EM has less buffering capacity than PIPES. I don't think I ever said that one buffer was inferior to another, just that choices should be made on the end result, not on whether a compound was toxic or not.
Regards,
Paul Webster.
Paul Webster, Ph.D House Ear Institute 2100 West Third Street Los Angeles, CA 90057 (213) 273 8026 pwebster-at-hei.org
} From: "Phillips, Thomas E." {PhillipsT-at-missouri.edu} } Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 17:22:17 -0600 } To: Paul Webster {PWebster-at-hei.org} , {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} } Subject: RE: [Microscopy] Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? } } PIPES has a pKa of 6.8 which would make it a suitable buffer for 6.3 - } 7.3 (and since aldehydes fixation tends to acidify the solution, it } would be good at 7.4 also!). Cacodylate has a pKa of 6.2. I guess it } depends on what pH you are using for your aldehydes fix but most people } use something closer to 7 so I don't see how PIPES pKa is inferior to } cacodylate. } } } } Thomas E. Phillips, Ph.D } Professor of Biological Sciences } Chair, MU Faculty Council } Director, Molecular Cytology Core } 2 Tucker Hall } University of Missouri } Columbia, MO 65211-7400 } 573-882-4712 (office) } 573-882-0123 (fax) } phillipst-at-missouri.edu } } http://www.biology.missouri.edu/faculty/phillips.html } http://www.biotech.missouri.edu/mcc/ } } } -----Original Message----- } From: Webster, Paul [mailto:PWebster-at-hei.org] } Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 5:15 PM } To: Phillips, Thomas E.; Microscopy-at-microscopy.com } Subject: Re: [Microscopy] Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? } } Hi All, } } My message about cacodylate was aimed at stimulating a continuation of } this } discussion, not to advocate the use of cacodylate buffer. However, the } toxicity of the compound should not be the only reason for not choosing } to } use it. The choice of buffer will also depend on the end result needed. } } My point in the first message was to point out that with proper training } it } is possible to handle almost any of the chemicals we encounter in a safe } way. } } One important caveat that I would add about using phosphate buffer in } the } primary fixative is that when mixed with glutaraldehyde and osmium } tetroxide } it can form a fine precipitate in the cells. } } If using phosphate buffer, and there are plenty of historical references } where it was used successfully for TEM, make sure the cells or tissues } are } washed well after glutaraldehyde fixation and before immersion in osmium } tetroxide. } } The choice of buffers for EM is another subject that deserves a long } discussion thread. Tom Phillips suggests the use of Good buffers as an } alternative to cacodylate. However, PIPES and HEPES will preserve } tissues } and cells in very different ways when compared with each other, as well } as } with cacodylate or phosphate buffers. This is partially due to the } amount of } extraction that occurs. In addition, PIPES buffer is often used at a pH } where it has almost no buffering capacity, HEPES can preserve tissues so } well that there is almost no extraction of cellular material, which } results } in virtually no specimen contrast and TRIS buffer may not work at all } due to } its ability to react with the aldehyde. In the end, fixation recipe } changes } should be approached with some caution. } } Best regards, } } Paul. } } } Paul Webster, Ph.D } House Ear Institute } 2100 West Third Street } Los Angeles, CA 90057 } (213) 273 8026 } pwebster-at-hei.org } } } } From: "Phillips, Thomas E." {PhillipsT-at-missouri.edu} } } Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 15:18:37 -0600 } } To: Paul Webster {PWebster-at-hei.org} , {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} } } Subject: RE: [Microscopy] Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? } } } } I naturally agree with Paul that with proper training that all the } } chemicals used in an EM are safe but that doesn't make it a good idea } to } } use them indiscriminately. The comparison to bacteria and viruses is a } } red herring since those are typically the subject of interest as } opposed } } to the selection of a buffer which is discretionary. Microscopists and } } other scientists inevitably generate hazardous waste but it is } incumbent } } on us not to do so unless there is a scientific reason that it is the } } only way to do the experiment. } } } } It is true that glutaraldehyde in phosphate buffer is dangerous. But } } glutaraldehyde in cacodylate buffer is more dangerous. Accidental } } exposure would mean exposure to two dangerous chemicals. In addition, } } adding acid to glutaraldehyde in phosphate will change the pH but not } } release arsenic gas. Many studies have shown the Good buffers to be } } suitable for LM and EM studies. I see no reason for any microscopist } to } } cling to the use of cacodylate. } } } } Paul's own horror story of poor training and supervision is further } } evidence of why one should minimize all unnecessary risks. I doubt any } } trained scientist would any chemical they don't fully understand } outside } } of the hood and without gloves - that's a beginner's mistake. Unless } one } } can guarantee being present at every step of a new student's } processing, } } it would only be prudent to use the least toxic formulations. With } } experience, those students will be able to judge the risks they wish } to } } take. } } } } } } Thomas E. Phillips, Ph.D } } Professor of Biological Sciences } } Chair, MU Faculty Council } } Director, Molecular Cytology Core } } 2 Tucker Hall } } University of Missouri } } Columbia, MO 65211-7400 } } 573-882-4712 (office) } } 573-882-0123 (fax) } } phillipst-at-missouri.edu } } } } http://www.biology.missouri.edu/faculty/phillips.html } } http://www.biotech.missouri.edu/mcc/ } } } } -----Original Message----- } } From: PWebster-at-hei.org [mailto:PWebster-at-hei.org] } } Sent: Friday, January 09, 2009 2:46 PM } } To: Phillips, Thomas E. } } Subject: [Microscopy] Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? } } } } } } } } } } } ------------------------------------------------------------------------ } } ---- } } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of } } America } } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- } } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } } } ------------------------------------------------------------------------ } } ---- } } } } Dear All, } } } } I have always found it strange that there is so much concern about the } } use } } of cacodylate in the EM laboratory. I concede that it is dangerous } when } } handled incorrectly. However, I would think that phosphate buffer } } containing } } 2.5% glutaraldehyde is more dangerous, or even a 2% aqueous solution } of } } osmium tetroxide. At what point should students start taking } } responsibility } } for handling chemicals safely and when do the trainers bite the bullet } } and } } make sure the training is adequate? } } } } During my training I remember very clearly how I was taught how to } } handle } } pathogenic bacteria and viruses. The instructions were very clear and } } very } } strict, and followed the same basic rules of how I was trained to } handle } } radioactive material. Basically the instructions were that these } agents } } can } } make you sick and even kill you if you don't follow my instructions, } so } } you } } have to handle them as follows.... } } } } When I moved into electron microscopy, the training I was given to } } prepare } } biological specimens consisted of being given access to a fridge full } of } } chemicals and a written protocol. The brown spots on my hands appeared } } after } } a couple of hours but my corneas clouded over in about 30 min of my } } using } } the osmium tetroxide. I had been left completely unsupervised to } handle } } these chemicals without any prior warning of their dangers. } } Interestingly, } } when my supervisor found out about my use of the osmium tetroxide, and } } what } } it had done to me, he blamed me! } } } } With proper training, the chemicals we use in the EM lab are basically } } very } } safe. We use small amounts of them and store them in closed cabinets } so } } they } } should not affect our health in any way. } } } } Part of a good laboratory training course is teaching users how to } } handle } } toxic chemicals and how to pipette solutions without creating } aerosols. } } Making sure that protective gloves are used correctly is another } } important } } aspect of this training. } } } } If we train correctly, then it should be sufficient to warn students } } that } } they are handling materials designed to chemically alter biological } } material. At this point, I usually remind them that they are made of } } biological material too. } } } } Happy New Year } } (My New Years Resolution is very high!) } } } } Best regards, } } } } Paul Webster. } } } } Paul Webster, Ph.D } } House Ear Institute } } 2100 West Third Street } } Los Angeles, CA 90057 } } (213) 273 8026 } } pwebster-at-hei.org } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } } ==============================Original } } Headers============================== } } 16, 18 -- From PWebster-at-hei.org Fri Jan 9 14:45:35 2009 } } 16, 18 -- Received: from hi0sml1.hei.org (heimail.hei.org } [12.88.48.54] } } (may be forged)) } } 16, 18 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with } } ESMTP id n09KjYwS028110 } } 16, 18 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 } } 14:45:35 -0600 } } 16, 18 -- Received: from 10.10.42.117 ([10.10.42.117]) by } } hi0sml1.hei.org ([10.10.40.106]) with Microsoft Exchange Server } HTTP-DAV } } ; } } 16, 18 -- Fri, 9 Jan 2009 20:45:34 +0000 } } 16, 18 -- User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.15.0.081119 } } 16, 18 -- Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 12:45:30 -0800 } } 16, 18 -- Subject: Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? } } 16, 18 -- From: "Webster, Paul" {PWebster-at-hei.org} } } 16, 18 -- To: {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} } } 16, 18 -- Message-ID: {C58CF76A.1FB48%PWebster-at-hei.org} } } 16, 18 -- Thread-Topic: Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? } } 16, 18 -- Thread-Index: AclymzWCIWUJgAPwQOO74u5GyMglfw== } } 16, 18 -- Mime-version: 1.0 } } 16, 18 -- Content-type: text/plain; } } 16, 18 -- charset="US-ASCII" } } 16, 18 -- Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit } } ==============================End of - } } Headers============================== } } }
==============================Original Headers============================== 9, 19 -- From PWebster-at-hei.org Fri Jan 9 17:38:47 2009 9, 19 -- Received: from hi0sml1.hei.org (heimail.hei.org [12.88.48.54] (may be forged)) 9, 19 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n09NckbP012473 9, 19 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 17:38:47 -0600 9, 19 -- Received: from 10.10.42.117 ([10.10.42.117]) by hi0sml1.hei.org ([10.10.40.106]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; 9, 19 -- Fri, 9 Jan 2009 23:38:46 +0000 9, 19 -- User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.15.0.081119 9, 19 -- Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 15:38:44 -0800 9, 19 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? 9, 19 -- From: "Webster, Paul" {PWebster-at-hei.org} 9, 19 -- To: {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 9, 19 -- Message-ID: {C58D2004.1FB7C%PWebster-at-hei.org} 9, 19 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? 9, 19 -- Thread-Index: Aclym1aIby1FKakIQ163EmL7rOr/aAAArzOQAASC0WwAACdVkAAAqzm5 9, 19 -- In-Reply-To: {0510DC719E56F64BB2AD84EE64CE6BAD05BBD675-at-UM-XMAIL06.um.umsystem.edu} 9, 19 -- Mime-version: 1.0 9, 19 -- Content-type: text/plain; 9, 19 -- charset="US-ASCII" 9, 19 -- Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit ==============================End of - Headers==============================
Yes, I remember all this being discussed by a few of us, including you, back a few years ago. One guy essentially called my certified Geiger counter a liar. Like I saw in the past, I keep seeing web pages (EPA and Health Canada, for example) that say that DU is still 0.2-0.4 % U-235 versus the original 0.7%. I always remember that it is roughly only half to 70% depleted. My observation of the phenomena.
Someone strongly pointed out that U is an alpha emitter, not a gamma emitter, and I was not reading gamma radiation (but I was). You pointed out that it was the decay impurities that were the gamma emitters and that was what I was reading on my counter. I agree that U-238 and DU are still radioactive.
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/radiation/uranium-eng.php "It (uranium) consists of three isotopes: uranium-234, uranium-235 and uranium-238 which are present in amounts of 0.005%, 0.7%, and 99.3%, by weight, respectively." "The amounts of uranium-234 and uranium-235 remaining in depleted uranium metal are about 0.002% and 0.2%, respectively." Here's my favorite. "depleted uranium is 40% less radioactive than natural uranium." That means 60% of the radioactivity is still there. I am not sure that includes gamma but probably.
My main point this time around was that 'whatever was in all my bottles of DUAc', it was also a gamma emitter. Also, it is impossible to know the history of the manufacturing of the material and so one should take their own Geiger counter readings to see what gamma radiation is actually there. That's the final referee on the raw salt, IMO. It's also a measure of the impurities, I guess. Of course the dilution level makes the gamma levels less in the final solutions used in EM.
JMO,
Paul
At 04:14 PM 1/9/09 -0600, you wrote: } } } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America
==============================Original Headers============================== 8, 28 -- From beaurega-at-westol.com Fri Jan 9 18:07:34 2009 8, 28 -- Received: from smtp-gateway-7.winbeam.com (smtp-gateway-7.winbeam.com [64.84.96.4]) 8, 28 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0A07XPt026675 8, 28 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 18:07:34 -0600 8, 28 -- Received: from mail.winbeam.com (mail.winbeam.com [64.84.96.10]) 8, 28 -- by smtp-gateway-7.winbeam.com (8.13.1/8.12.8) with SMTP id n0A07Ub9025500 8, 28 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 19:07:31 -0500 8, 28 -- Received: (qmail 10525 invoked by uid 89); 10 Jan 2009 00:07:22 -0000 8, 28 -- Received: from pitts-69-72-13-226.dynamic-dialup.coretel.net (HELO running) (69.72.13.226) 8, 28 -- by mail.winbeam.com with SMTP; 10 Jan 2009 00:07:22 -0000 8, 28 -- Message-Id: {3.0.6.32.20090109190806.007dca80-at-pop3.norton.antivirus} 8, 28 -- X-Sender: beaurega/mail.westol.com-at-pop3.norton.antivirus 8, 28 -- X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.6 (32) 8, 28 -- Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 19:08:06 -0500 8, 28 -- To: tivol-at-caltech.edu, microscopy-at-microscopy.com 8, 28 -- From: Beaurega {beaurega-at-westol.com} 8, 28 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters 8, 28 -- In-Reply-To: {200901092214.n09MEsUf022098-at-ns.microscopy.com} 8, 28 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 8, 28 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 8, 28 -- X-Winbeam-MailScanner-Information: Winbeam - Please contact Technical Support for more information 8, 28 -- X-Winbeam-MailScanner-ID: n0A07Ub9025500 8, 28 -- X-Winbeam-MailScanner: Found to be clean Winbeam (courtesy of MailScanner) 8, 28 -- X-Winbeam-MailScanner-SpamCheck: notspam (whitelisted), spamassassin (cached, 8, 28 -- score=-1.904, required 4, autolearn=not spam, AWL 0.10, 8, 28 -- BAYES_00 -2.00) 8, 28 -- X-Winbeam-MailScanner-From: beaurega-at-westol.com 8, 28 -- X-Winbeam-MailScanner-Watermark: 1232150851.88685-at-le6fs513bArGrZgGqeFfmg ==============================End of - Headers==============================
One more consideration is the logistics of it all: are the students early college and new to science or advanced and already well on a science path? I say, save the hazardous stuff for the latter group, generally. Let them get hooked before you trot out the dangers! ;-) Also: class size matters a lot, and how much other stuff you have to fit into the class session (hazardous stuff needs a bit of time). I've found that most students will be fine, but there's always someone who wasn't paying attention and isn't careful, so you need a small class and a good lab setup (dangerous stuff not too close to other stuff). In one class (intro level) we were doing blood draws (for blood typing) and I was very surprised at how careless they were (especially when they were distracted by results), so I'd call them up in small groups, but this took a while and some of them still managed to get blood where it shouldn't have been. (Nothing serious, but it kept me on my toes a bit too much for comfort.)
In training my students in microscopy, I try to impart good habits, figuring, better they should start at the "taking extreme care level" then when their habits inevitably decay, they'll still have decent enough habits. It's funny when I forget myself to follow the rules (always koehler, no food near scopes, start on low power). Just the other day my own tech glared at me when I walked into the scope room, and it took me a sec, but i realized that i was holding (and eating) very crumbly food.
On the other extreme, we once had a stockroom tech here who was very afraid of all chemicals, despite her degree in biology. She told me (I have this in email, so I wasn't hallucinating it) that she couldn't prepare a NaCl solution for me because she hadn't had safety training yet. Really!
Gisele
==============================Original Headers============================== 6, 27 -- From tiger3g3-at-yahoo.com Fri Jan 9 22:27:25 2009 6, 27 -- Received: from n17.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com (n17.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com [68.142.206.144]) 6, 27 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with SMTP id n0A4RPM1014323 6, 27 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 22:27:25 -0600 6, 27 -- Received: from [68.142.194.244] by n17.bullet.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 10 Jan 2009 04:27:25 -0000 6, 27 -- Received: from [68.142.201.66] by t2.bullet.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 10 Jan 2009 04:27:25 -0000 6, 27 -- Received: from [127.0.0.1] by omp418.mail.mud.yahoo.com with NNFMP; 10 Jan 2009 04:27:25 -0000 6, 27 -- X-Yahoo-Newman-Id: 144280.94259.bm-at-omp418.mail.mud.yahoo.com 6, 27 -- Received: (qmail 10754 invoked from network); 10 Jan 2009 04:27:24 -0000 6, 27 -- DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; 6, 27 -- s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; 6, 27 -- h=Received:X-YMail-OSG:X-Yahoo-Newman-Property:Mime-Version:X-Sender:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References:Date:To:From:Subject:Content-Type; 6, 27 -- b=GASZ7cSffEmx323Qb16TrqtdbcP/SnEoR0vEf8//n0B03XAdsDlaKb1HXQ89y9cHb9XRhu8tpYLNUtp1AESktNO8NmwSNyzIkQGyZJGlo7D4TtB5Qk52/jh344F4Au7M1TuRWnIfVkFK2eN0/eNbBqeoXRvLbYubV5NZSV+cKn4= ; 6, 27 -- Received: from unknown (HELO ?98.207.93.115?) (tiger3g3-at-98.207.93.115 with plain) 6, 27 -- by smtp105.plus.mail.sp1.yahoo.com with SMTP; 10 Jan 2009 04:27:24 -0000 6, 27 -- X-YMail-OSG: e7IKwhcVM1l3xBi7aKLaR11lkO5AIcUMmtp5Ce6HYsv2vUvu50c1nRr4X.4sh_tcEIe_bIfMmsW_CxDFCpdpTGN0KwsWDLNEGGPChjfh476nlZsYepenCBKGQzGosezMyVCtpuoGQ8d5N9JFOL_rV.2XvycnRs91p4HPpEQGVrEt45Gi1T6yjLA4oZo- 6, 27 -- X-Yahoo-Newman-Property: ymail-3 6, 27 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 6, 27 -- X-Sender: tiger3g3-at-pop.mail.yahoo.com 6, 27 -- Message-Id: {a05111b44c58dd02ea52e-at-[98.207.93.115]} 6, 27 -- In-Reply-To: {200901092123.n09LNTVK021406-at-ns.microscopy.com} 6, 27 -- References: {200901092123.n09LNTVK021406-at-ns.microscopy.com} 6, 27 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 20:27:23 -0800 6, 27 -- To: microscopy-at-microscopy.com 6, 27 -- From: Gisele Eliane Giorgi {tiger3g3-at-yahoo.com} 6, 27 -- Subject: [Microscopy] RE: Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? 6, 27 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" ==============================End of - Headers==============================
Listers - I have samples to prepare for inspection by SEM, and the client wants to know about the grain size. We have never polished metals before. Is there anyone who can advise me what to do, or does this take a metallurgist? Carol Heckman, Bowling Green State University
==============================Original Headers============================== 1, 19 -- From heckman-at-buckeye-express.com Sat Jan 10 00:50:38 2009 1, 19 -- Received: from omta0106.mta.everyone.net (imta-38.everyone.net [216.200.145.38]) 1, 19 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0A6ocXh001891 1, 19 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 00:50:38 -0600 1, 19 -- Received: from dm24.mta.everyone.net (sj1-slb03-gw2 [172.16.1.96]) 1, 19 -- by omta0106.mta.everyone.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14B4072C3DD 1, 19 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 22:51:05 -0800 (PST) 1, 19 -- X-Eon-Dm: dm24 1, 19 -- Received: by resin15.mta.everyone.net (EON-PICKUP) 1, 19 -- id resin15.4962afe0.2912b; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 22:50:37 -0800 1, 19 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 1, 19 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" 1, 19 -- Message-Id: {20090109225037.A97AB905-at-resin15.mta.everyone.net} 1, 19 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 22:50:37 -0800 1, 19 -- From: {heckman-at-buckeye-express.com} 1, 19 -- To: {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 1, 19 -- Subject: polishing stainless steel and silver metal surfaces 1, 19 -- X-Eon-Sig: AQK8SgtJaEU99JcqNgEAAAAB,8565da5615434e3c9ae0f09b36273f8f 1, 19 -- X-Originating-Ip: [72.241.42.208] ==============================End of - Headers==============================
You might be better off delegating this one to somebody in the materials science department, but if you want to try it yourself, I can help you with the silver. You didn't mention what silver alloy you're attempting to prepare, or it's form, but here's a method that works well for preparing fine and sterling silver, yellow and white gold alloys, nickel, copper alloys, and silver solders on rotating wheels at 400 rpm. The type of lubricant, cloth selection, and pressure are important.
1) Grind through a succession of SiC papers from 240 through 600 grit using moderate pressure with running water lubricant. Rinse or ultrasonically clean after each paper. Dry. 2) Coarse polish on a napless cotton cloth with 6 micron diamond (I use a suspension), and moderate pressure with a commercial diamond extender. Ultrasonically clean and dry. 3) Fine polish on a short-napped synthetic velvet cloth with 1 micron diamond (I use a suspension) and deionized water lubricant using moderate to light pressure. Ultrasonically clean and dry.
You'll have to etch the silver to reveal the grain size after polishing. Without knowing what silver alloy you're working with, try a 50/50 mixture of ammonium hydroxide and hydrogen peroxide (30% concentration). The etch works very fast. It can be diluted with DI water to slow the attack. Apply by swabbing. Do not store.
Good luck,
Jeff Stewart Metallographic Lab Manager Stern-Leach Company Cookson Precious Metals 49 Pearl Street Attleboro, MA 02703 508-222-7400 x1329
-----Original Message----- X-from: heckman-at-buckeye-express.com [mailto:heckman-at-buckeye-express.com] Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 1:58 AM To: jeff-at-metallography.com
Listers - I have samples to prepare for inspection by SEM, and the client wants to know about the grain size. We have never polished metals before. Is there anyone who can advise me what to do, or does this take a metallurgist? Carol Heckman, Bowling Green State University
==============================Original Headers============================== 1, 19 -- From heckman-at-buckeye-express.com Sat Jan 10 00:50:38 2009 1, 19 -- Received: from omta0106.mta.everyone.net (imta-38.everyone.net [216.200.145.38]) 1, 19 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0A6ocXh001891 1, 19 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 00:50:38 -0600 1, 19 -- Received: from dm24.mta.everyone.net (sj1-slb03-gw2 [172.16.1.96]) 1, 19 -- by omta0106.mta.everyone.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14B4072C3DD 1, 19 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 22:51:05 -0800 (PST) 1, 19 -- X-Eon-Dm: dm24 1, 19 -- Received: by resin15.mta.everyone.net (EON-PICKUP) 1, 19 -- id resin15.4962afe0.2912b; Fri, 9 Jan 2009 22:50:37 -0800 1, 19 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 1, 19 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" 1, 19 -- Message-Id: {20090109225037.A97AB905-at-resin15.mta.everyone.net} 1, 19 -- Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 22:50:37 -0800 1, 19 -- From: {heckman-at-buckeye-express.com} 1, 19 -- To: {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 1, 19 -- Subject: polishing stainless steel and silver metal surfaces 1, 19 -- X-Eon-Sig: AQK8SgtJaEU99JcqNgEAAAAB,8565da5615434e3c9ae0f09b36273f8f 1, 19 -- X-Originating-Ip: [72.241.42.208] ==============================End of - Headers============================== Internal Virus Database is out of date. Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.13/1825 - Release Date: 12/2/2008 8:44 PM
==============================Original Headers============================== 12, 39 -- From SRS0=BqBZVq=5O=metallography.com=jeff-at-eigbox.net Sat Jan 10 07:13:48 2009 12, 39 -- Received: from bosmailout13.eigbox.net (bosmailout13.eigbox.net [66.96.190.13]) 12, 39 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0ADDm4T030867 12, 39 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 07:13:48 -0600 12, 39 -- Message-Id: {200901101313.n0ADDm4T030867-at-ns.microscopy.com} 12, 39 -- Received: from bosmailscan16.eigbox.net ([10.20.15.16]) 12, 39 -- by bosmailout13.eigbox.net with esmtp (Exim) 12, 39 -- id 1LLdeu-0005st-5e 12, 39 -- for microscopy-at-microscopy.com; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:13:48 -0500 12, 39 -- Received: from bosimpout01.eigbox.net ([10.20.55.1]) 12, 39 -- by bosmailscan16.eigbox.net with esmtp (Exim) 12, 39 -- id 1LLdeu-0001p7-3n 12, 39 -- for microscopy-at-microscopy.com; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:13:48 -0500 12, 39 -- Received: from bosauthsmtp04.eigbox.net ([10.20.18.4]) 12, 39 -- by bosimpout01.eigbox.net with NO UCE 12, 39 -- id 1kzR1b00205GATN0000000; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 03:59:25 -0500 12, 39 -- X-EN-OrigOutIP: 10.20.18.4 12, 39 -- X-EN-IMPSID: 1kzR1b00205GATN0000000 12, 39 -- Received: from pool-71-184-39-246.bstnma.east.verizon.net ([71.184.39.246] helo=Jeff) 12, 39 -- by bosauthsmtp04.eigbox.net with esmtpa (Exim) 12, 39 -- id 1LLdei-0004z3-GC 12, 39 -- for Microscopy-at-microscopy.com; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:13:37 -0500 12, 39 -- From: "Jeff Stewart" {jeff-at-metallography.com} 12, 39 -- To: {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 12, 39 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] polishing stainless steel and silver metal surfaces 12, 39 -- Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:13:26 -0500 12, 39 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 12, 39 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 12, 39 -- charset="us-ascii" 12, 39 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 12, 39 -- X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 12, 39 -- Thread-Index: Acly8LYf6PtvJgQ4TkOQ3DxLbWpvMgAL34gg 12, 39 -- In-Reply-To: {200901100657.n0A6vW0N015262-at-ns.microscopy.com} 12, 39 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 12, 39 -- X-EN-UserInfo: e86f17d72db2b073c5072c937c9a2a3f:f6ee1f837e2a1583e399b28f5cf1cc41 12, 39 -- X-EN-AuthUser: jeff-at-metallography.com 12, 39 -- Sender: "Jeff Stewart" {jeff-at-metallography.com} 12, 39 -- X-EN-OrigIP: 71.184.39.246 12, 39 -- X-EN-OrigHost: pool-71-184-39-246.bstnma.east.verizon.net ==============================End of - Headers==============================
If you are looking to measure the grain size of the stainless steel, refer to ASTM E112 for the measurement procedure. You will need to properly polish and etch first. The alloy will dictate the proper etchant to use. Try Viella's for 400 series. For 300 series, try Kalling's II, Glyceregia or electrolytic 10% oxalic.
Do not store glyceregia!
Alan Stone ASTON
At 12:51 AM 1/10/2009, heckman-at-buckeye-express.com wrote:
} ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America
Alan Stone ASTON Metallurgical Services Co., Inc.
This confidential message is for the private use of the recipient as shown. If this has been delivered to you in error, then please return the message and delete from your files. Thank you.
==============================Original Headers============================== 12, 22 -- From as-at-astonmet.com Sat Jan 10 09:26:00 2009 12, 22 -- Received: from outbound2.mail.tds.net (outbound2.mail.tds.net [216.170.230.92]) 12, 22 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0AFQ07a015853 12, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 09:26:00 -0600 12, 22 -- Received: from outaamta02.mail.tds.net (outaamta02.mail.tds.net [216.170.230.32]) 12, 22 -- by outbound2.mail.tds.net (8.13.6/8.13.4) with ESMTP id n0AFQ0PY000412 12, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 09:26:00 -0600 12, 22 -- Received: from mozart.astonmet.com ([69.11.219.4]) 12, 22 -- by outaamta02.mail.tds.net with ESMTP 12, 22 -- id {20090110152559.DTZC4416.outaamta02.mail.tds.net-at-mozart.astonmet.com} 12, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 09:25:59 -0600 12, 22 -- X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9 12, 22 -- Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 09:25:58 -0600 12, 22 -- To: microscopy-at-microscopy.com 12, 22 -- From: Alan Stone {as-at-astonmet.com} 12, 22 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] polishing stainless steel and silver metal 12, 22 -- surfaces 12, 22 -- In-Reply-To: {200901100651.n0A6pis2003576-at-ns.microscopy.com} 12, 22 -- References: {200901100651.n0A6pis2003576-at-ns.microscopy.com} 12, 22 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 12, 22 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed 12, 22 -- Message-Id: {20090110152559.DTZC4416.outaamta02.mail.tds.net-at-mozart.astonmet.com} ==============================End of - Headers==============================
I'm sorry about sounding a bit negative in my previous post. I did not mean to school anybody.
I just wanted to clarify that the radioactive decay process of U-238 continues via further decay of daughter nuclei with different modes of decay. And people can do their own calculations, as well.
Regards, Ayten.
-- =========================== Ayten Celik-Aktas, PhD Ankara University Electron Microscopy Laboratory Ankara, Turkey ===========================
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 4:44 PM, {dac-at-research.umass.edu} wrote: } } } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } Dear Ayten, } } Your comments are informative but, to my personal taste, definitely a } bit negative in tone for this list. Your "schooling" of Alex isn't } really necessary and I think we could get your information in a more } positive and collegial way. } } Regarding the decay tree, I note from the provided link information that } the half-life of U-238 is { {4.468E+9 years} } . It has been a while since } my high school chemistry but I'm wondering how much Th-234 and } associated beta emission danger we are really dealing with here; seems } like there must be a very small amount of Th-234 produced with such a } long half-life of the original U-238. Maybe you could comment on the } danger of this. } } Thanks, } } Dale } } } celikaktas-at-gmail.com wrote: } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America } } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } } } Dear Alex, } } } } Did you have a chance to check the information from } } } } http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html } } } } Let me construct the decay tree. I'm sure everybody in this list can } } do it but, you keep insisting that "uranyl compounds are alpha } } emitters only" so, I will take the time to do the job and post in to } } the list. } } } } Let's start with U-238 which is the starting element in your compound. } } } } 1) U-238 decays into Th-234 by Alpha decay } } } } 2) Th-234 decays into Pa-234 by Beta decay } } } } 3) Pa-234 decays into U-234 by Beta decay } } } } 4) U-234 decays into Th-230 by Alpha decay } } } } 5) Th-230 decays into Ra-226 by Alpha decay } } } } 6) Ra-226 decays into Rn-222 by Alpha decay } } } } 7) Rn-222 decays into Po-218 by Alpha decay } } } } 8) Po-218 decays into Pb-214 by Alpha decay } } } } 9) Pb-214 decays into Bi-214 by Beta decay } } } } 10) Bi-214 decays into Po-214 by Beta decay } } } } 11) Po-214 decays into Pb-210 by Alpha decay } } } } 12) Pb-210 decays into Bi-210 by Beta decay } } } } 13) Bi-210 decays into Po-210 by Beta decay } } } } 14) Po-210 decays into Pb-206 by Alpha decay } } } } Pb-206 is STABLE so, it is the last element to be produced as a result } } of U-238 radioactive decay. } } } } I have constructed the above decay tree using the information from } } http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html } } While constructing the above decay tree I have used the branch which } } has the highest branch ratio (above 99% in each case). } } } } I do not understand why you are trying to keep things "under control"? } } } } By the way, I'm a Nuclear Engineer. } } } } One does not even need to be nuclear engineer to understand this. Even } } in high school science classes people learn about radioactive decay } } series e.g. A decays into B and B decays into C... } } } } Best, } } Ayten. } } } } -- } =========================== } Ayten Celik-Aktas, PhD } Ankara University } Electron Microscopy Laboratory } Ankara, Turkey } ===========================
Based on Dale's reported half life for U238, the specific activity for U238 would be 1.2x10exp4 DPS, or about 0.3 uCi/g. This is very small activity and they're alpha particles, which can be shielded best by plastic to avoid Bremstrahlung and secondary x-ray production. The daughter products will accumulate and decay according to their schemes and half-lives, which makes it more difficult to calculate. (See "Nuclear and Radiochemistry", by Friedlander, Kennedy, Miller, for a treatise on the differential equations to calculate activity from multiple decay pathways.)
The best is to just measure it with a survey meter and see what the external total dose rate in mr/hr is. Don't be afraid if your meter 'pegs' on the lowest (most sensitive setting). A sample with a field over several mr/hr over background should be handled according to practices used for handling radioactive materials.
Hope that helps a bit.
Don Kloos VP Sales, Marketing, Business Development Parallax Research
-----Original Message----- X-from: celikaktas-at-gmail.com [mailto:celikaktas-at-gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 8:59 AM To: dkloos-at-parallaxray.com
Dear Listers,
I'm sorry about sounding a bit negative in my previous post. I did not mean to school anybody.
I just wanted to clarify that the radioactive decay process of U-238 continues via further decay of daughter nuclei with different modes of decay. And people can do their own calculations, as well.
Regards, Ayten.
-- =========================== Ayten Celik-Aktas, PhD Ankara University Electron Microscopy Laboratory Ankara, Turkey ===========================
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 4:44 PM, {dac-at-research.umass.edu} wrote: } } } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } Dear Ayten, } } Your comments are informative but, to my personal taste, definitely a } bit negative in tone for this list. Your "schooling" of Alex isn't } really necessary and I think we could get your information in a more } positive and collegial way. } } Regarding the decay tree, I note from the provided link information that } the half-life of U-238 is { {4.468E+9 years} } . It has been a while since } my high school chemistry but I'm wondering how much Th-234 and } associated beta emission danger we are really dealing with here; seems } like there must be a very small amount of Th-234 produced with such a } long half-life of the original U-238. Maybe you could comment on the } danger of this. } } Thanks, } } Dale } } } celikaktas-at-gmail.com wrote: } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America } } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } } } Dear Alex, } } } } Did you have a chance to check the information from } } } } http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html } } } } Let me construct the decay tree. I'm sure everybody in this list can } } do it but, you keep insisting that "uranyl compounds are alpha } } emitters only" so, I will take the time to do the job and post in to } } the list. } } } } Let's start with U-238 which is the starting element in your compound. } } } } 1) U-238 decays into Th-234 by Alpha decay } } } } 2) Th-234 decays into Pa-234 by Beta decay } } } } 3) Pa-234 decays into U-234 by Beta decay } } } } 4) U-234 decays into Th-230 by Alpha decay } } } } 5) Th-230 decays into Ra-226 by Alpha decay } } } } 6) Ra-226 decays into Rn-222 by Alpha decay } } } } 7) Rn-222 decays into Po-218 by Alpha decay } } } } 8) Po-218 decays into Pb-214 by Alpha decay } } } } 9) Pb-214 decays into Bi-214 by Beta decay } } } } 10) Bi-214 decays into Po-214 by Beta decay } } } } 11) Po-214 decays into Pb-210 by Alpha decay } } } } 12) Pb-210 decays into Bi-210 by Beta decay } } } } 13) Bi-210 decays into Po-210 by Beta decay } } } } 14) Po-210 decays into Pb-206 by Alpha decay } } } } Pb-206 is STABLE so, it is the last element to be produced as a result } } of U-238 radioactive decay. } } } } I have constructed the above decay tree using the information from } } http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html } } While constructing the above decay tree I have used the branch which } } has the highest branch ratio (above 99% in each case). } } } } I do not understand why you are trying to keep things "under control"? } } } } By the way, I'm a Nuclear Engineer. } } } } One does not even need to be nuclear engineer to understand this. Even } } in high school science classes people learn about radioactive decay } } series e.g. A decays into B and B decays into C... } } } } Best, } } Ayten. } } } } -- } =========================== } Ayten Celik-Aktas, PhD } Ankara University } Electron Microscopy Laboratory } Ankara, Turkey } ===========================
I'm definitely not an expert in this field but from a bit of reading it seems that it is anything but a clear and simple story and measurement is clearly the way to go. In my poking around and reading I did run into a mention of U-238 giving off gamma rays as a result of alpha emission. Maybe this explains the gamma ray emission that Paul Beauregard reported. For what it's worth.......
Alpha particles (named after and denoted by the first letter in the Greek alphabet, α) consist of two protons and two neutrons bound together into a particle identical to a helium nucleus; hence, it can be written as He2+ or 42He2+. They are a highly ionizing form of particle radiation, and have low penetration.
Alpha particles are emitted by radioactive nuclei such as uranium, thorium, actinium, or radium in a process known as alpha decay. This sometimes leaves the nucleus in an excited state, with the emission of a gamma ray removing the excess energy.
dkloos-at-parallaxray.com wrote: } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } Based on Dale's reported half life for U238, the specific activity for U238 } would be 1.2x10exp4 DPS, or about 0.3 uCi/g. This is very small activity } and they're alpha particles, which can be shielded best by plastic to avoid } Bremstrahlung and secondary x-ray production. The daughter products will } accumulate and decay according to their schemes and half-lives, which makes } it more difficult to calculate. (See "Nuclear and Radiochemistry", by } Friedlander, Kennedy, Miller, for a treatise on the differential equations } to calculate activity from multiple decay pathways.) } } The best is to just measure it with a survey meter and see what the external } total dose rate in mr/hr is. Don't be afraid if your meter 'pegs' on the } lowest (most sensitive setting). A sample with a field over several mr/hr } over background should be handled according to practices used for handling } radioactive materials. } } Hope that helps a bit. } } Don Kloos } VP Sales, Marketing, Business Development } Parallax Research } } (Ex-Radiochemist) } } } Sales & Marketing } 16478 Beach Blvd. #330 } Westminster, California, 92683-7860 USA } } TOLL FREE 1 866 581-XRAY (9729) } Telephone 1 714 897-9779 } Fax 1 714 897-1421 } Email: dkloos-at-parallaxray.com } SKYPE: don.kloos } Website: http://www.parallaxray.com } } } -----Original Message----- } X-from: celikaktas-at-gmail.com [mailto:celikaktas-at-gmail.com] } Sent: Saturday, January 10, 2009 8:59 AM } To: dkloos-at-parallaxray.com } Subject: [Microscopy] Re: viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters } } } } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } Dear Listers, } } I'm sorry about sounding a bit negative in my previous post. I did not } mean to school anybody. } } I just wanted to clarify that the radioactive decay process of U-238 } continues via further decay of daughter nuclei with different modes of } decay. And people can do their own calculations, as well. } } Regards, } Ayten. } } } -- } =========================== } Ayten Celik-Aktas, PhD } Ankara University } Electron Microscopy Laboratory } Ankara, Turkey } =========================== } } On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 4:44 PM, {dac-at-research.umass.edu} wrote: } } } } } } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America } } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } Dear Ayten, } } } } Your comments are informative but, to my personal taste, definitely a } } bit negative in tone for this list. Your "schooling" of Alex isn't } } really necessary and I think we could get your information in a more } } positive and collegial way. } } } } Regarding the decay tree, I note from the provided link information that } } the half-life of U-238 is { {4.468E+9 years} } . It has been a while since } } my high school chemistry but I'm wondering how much Th-234 and } } associated beta emission danger we are really dealing with here; seems } } like there must be a very small amount of Th-234 produced with such a } } long half-life of the original U-238. Maybe you could comment on the } } danger of this. } } } } Thanks, } } } } Dale } } } } } } celikaktas-at-gmail.com wrote: } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of } America } } } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } } } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } } } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } } Dear Alex, } } } } } } Did you have a chance to check the information from } } } } } } http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html } } } } } } Let me construct the decay tree. I'm sure everybody in this list can } } } do it but, you keep insisting that "uranyl compounds are alpha } } } emitters only" so, I will take the time to do the job and post in to } } } the list. } } } } } } Let's start with U-238 which is the starting element in your compound. } } } } } } 1) U-238 decays into Th-234 by Alpha decay } } } } } } 2) Th-234 decays into Pa-234 by Beta decay } } } } } } 3) Pa-234 decays into U-234 by Beta decay } } } } } } 4) U-234 decays into Th-230 by Alpha decay } } } } } } 5) Th-230 decays into Ra-226 by Alpha decay } } } } } } 6) Ra-226 decays into Rn-222 by Alpha decay } } } } } } 7) Rn-222 decays into Po-218 by Alpha decay } } } } } } 8) Po-218 decays into Pb-214 by Alpha decay } } } } } } 9) Pb-214 decays into Bi-214 by Beta decay } } } } } } 10) Bi-214 decays into Po-214 by Beta decay } } } } } } 11) Po-214 decays into Pb-210 by Alpha decay } } } } } } 12) Pb-210 decays into Bi-210 by Beta decay } } } } } } 13) Bi-210 decays into Po-210 by Beta decay } } } } } } 14) Po-210 decays into Pb-206 by Alpha decay } } } } } } Pb-206 is STABLE so, it is the last element to be produced as a result } } } of U-238 radioactive decay. } } } } } } I have constructed the above decay tree using the information from } } } http://atom.kaeri.re.kr/ton/nuc7.html } } } While constructing the above decay tree I have used the branch which } } } has the highest branch ratio (above 99% in each case). } } } } } } I do not understand why you are trying to keep things "under control"? } } } } } } By the way, I'm a Nuclear Engineer. } } } } } } One does not even need to be nuclear engineer to understand this. Even } } } in high school science classes people learn about radioactive decay } } } series e.g. A decays into B and B decays into C... } } } } } } Best, } } } Ayten. } } } } } -- } } =========================== } } Ayten Celik-Aktas, PhD } } Ankara University } } Electron Microscopy Laboratory } } Ankara, Turkey } } =========================== } } ==============================Original Headers============================== } 7, 34 -- From celikaktas-at-gmail.com Sat Jan 10 10:50:09 2009 } 7, 34 -- Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com } [72.14.220.157]) } 7, 34 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id } n0AGo8B5031858 } 7, 34 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 10:50:09 } -0600 } 7, 34 -- Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 13so3751505fge.4 } 7, 34 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 08:50:08 } -0800 (PST) } 7, 34 -- DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; } 7, 34 -- d=gmail.com; s=gamma; } 7, 34 -- } h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references } 7, 34 -- :date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type } 7, 34 -- :content-transfer-encoding; } 7, 34 -- bh=b7SWPFZhMaWulbg1hGRPoUW6eYkvHtar8baNSsG43Z4=; } 7, 34 -- } b=m6xReT0PDvt+APSQ6xOAxowj5D8DRGNg/bb+JG79oNc2HYhEhuTh9MtHO4oxtZFgiJ } 7, 34 -- } 6gUlLRLqq6iO9QomoUY2ApzZvVy5ibE25mjMdYIw36ykLMNyGPxvd0geHyrIE/HcbJTw } 7, 34 -- sy3ySqK30W1KHQSrpz3P2BccaH10kqzXJON3w= } 7, 34 -- DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; } 7, 34 -- d=gmail.com; s=gamma; } 7, 34 -- } h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to } 7, 34 -- :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; } 7, 34 -- } b=x6wLqhBvlIB7ko+B5XBu53zczgEI647iuiv9yDkFq+Xm3ov7YKVjwqQ11peUA1lb9N } 7, 34 -- } k31yM6C+OV/4dQcHT4SGtgbvtbt2wRrDGp4CJpXUZ+sNM91L9SEMCvmkc7tIQJutoUYR } 7, 34 -- BjkHZIK2Q5wsp3wzSv9YsQXZX0KASiwGb5WwE= } 7, 34 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 } 7, 34 -- Received: by 10.103.217.5 with SMTP id } u5mr9668029muq.42.1231606207534; Sat, } 7, 34 -- 10 Jan 2009 08:50:07 -0800 (PST) } 7, 34 -- In-Reply-To: {200901091444.n09Ei6HG011125-at-ns.microscopy.com} } 7, 34 -- References: {200901091444.n09Ei6HG011125-at-ns.microscopy.com} } 7, 34 -- Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 18:50:07 +0200 } 7, 34 -- Message-ID: } {1075c5c10901100850u20dcb242nd050b7702a79e92d-at-mail.gmail.com} } 7, 34 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha } emitters } 7, 34 -- From: Ayten Celik-Aktas {celikaktas-at-gmail.com} } 7, 34 -- To: microscopy {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} } 7, 34 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 } 7, 34 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit } ==============================End of - Headers============================== } } } ==============================Original Headers============================== } 18, 30 -- From dkloos-at-parallaxray.com Sat Jan 10 14:35:05 2009 } 18, 30 -- Received: from cp18.heritagewebdesign.com (cp18.heritagewebdesign.com [209.90.77.54]) } 18, 30 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0AKZ5fk021450 } 18, 30 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 14:35:05 -0600 } 18, 30 -- Received: from user-0c8gg59.cable.mindspring.com ([24.136.64.169] helo=donl) } 18, 30 -- by cp18.heritagewebdesign.com with esmtpa (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) } 18, 30 -- (envelope-from {dkloos-at-parallaxray.com} ) } 18, 30 -- id 1LLkY3-0009W7-On; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 13:35:11 -0700 } 18, 30 -- Reply-To: {dkloos-at-parallaxray.com} } 18, 30 -- From: "Don Kloos" {dkloos-at-parallaxray.com} } 18, 30 -- To: {celikaktas-at-gmail.com} } 18, 30 -- Cc: {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} } 18, 30 -- References: {200901101659.n0AGx43H012719-at-ns.microscopy.com} } 18, 30 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] Re: viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters } 18, 30 -- Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 12:34:58 -0800 } 18, 30 -- Organization: Parallax Research } 18, 30 -- Message-ID: {E3F6FCD7F3614856949442747BC989B8-at-donl} } 18, 30 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 } 18, 30 -- Content-Type: text/plain; } 18, 30 -- charset="us-ascii" } 18, 30 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit } 18, 30 -- X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 } 18, 30 -- Thread-Index: AclzRMI1owznMu3ZRCWFEukvLFTfPAAHKnng } 18, 30 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 } 18, 30 -- In-Reply-To: {200901101659.n0AGx43H012719-at-ns.microscopy.com} } 18, 30 -- X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report } 18, 30 -- X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - cp18.heritagewebdesign.com } 18, 30 -- X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - microscopy.com } 18, 30 -- X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [26 6] / [26 6] } 18, 30 -- X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - parallaxray.com } ==============================End of - Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 9, 20 -- From dac-at-research.umass.edu Sat Jan 10 17:06:10 2009 9, 20 -- Received: from race5.oit.umass.edu (race5.oit.umass.edu [128.119.101.41]) 9, 20 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0AN69aV006061 9, 20 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 17:06:09 -0600 9, 20 -- Received: from [192.168.1.100] (static.unknown.charter.com [96.39.6.64] (may be forged)) 9, 20 -- (authenticated bits=0) 9, 20 -- by race5.oit.umass.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n0AN68eV026533 9, 20 -- (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) 9, 20 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Sat, 10 Jan 2009 18:06:08 -0500 9, 20 -- Message-ID: {49692A12.7080904-at-research.umass.edu} 9, 20 -- Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2009 18:06:58 -0500 9, 20 -- From: Dale Callaham {dac-at-research.umass.edu} 9, 20 -- User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.8.1.19) Gecko/20081204 SeaMonkey/1.1.14 9, 20 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 9, 20 -- To: Microscopy List {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 9, 20 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters 9, 20 -- References: {200901102040.n0AKekds029574-at-ns.microscopy.com} 9, 20 -- In-Reply-To: {200901102040.n0AKekds029574-at-ns.microscopy.com} 9, 20 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed 9, 20 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit ==============================End of - Headers==============================
This Question/Comment was submitted to the Microscopy Listserver using the WWW based Form at http://microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/MLFormMail.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember this posting is most likely not from a Subscriber, so when replying please copy both przybylowicz-at-tlabs.ac.za as well as the MIcroscopy Listserver ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: przybylowicz-at-tlabs.ac.za Name: Wojciech Przybylowicz
Organization: iThemba LABS, South Africa
Title-Subject: [Filtered] Post-doctoral fellow (NMP) - two years contract with extension possibility
Question: Post-doctoral fellow (NMP) - two years contract with extension possibility
Position: Nuclear microprobe analysis of thin frozen-hydrated biological specimens
Applications are invited for this position in our Materials Research Group (MRG) of iThemba LABS, situated ca. 30 km from Cape Town, South Africa.
Responsibilities will include: - Adapting the cryo-stage coupled to the MRG nuclear microprobe for measurements of thin specimens in frozen-hydrated state - Active involvement in research projects related to biological applications of ion beam techniques and generating new applications.
Minimum requirements:
- PhD in Biology/Chemistry/Physics with strong emphasis on cryo-preparation of biological specimens and low temperature electron microscopy - Experience in operating SEM/TEM and knowledge of EDS technique as well as cryo-ultramicrotomy - Experience in operating a nuclear microprobe and familiarity with PIXE as an advantage - Relevant conference presentations and publications as well as international exposure - Knowledge of statistical methods - Computer literacy (Word, Excel, Corel, etc.)
We offer a competitive remuneration package, which includes normal company benefits.
Forward your detailed CV, accompanied by a covering letter and supporting documents, to the Human Resource Department; iThemba LABS, P.O. Box 722, Somerset West 7129, or fax (+27-21-8433756), or via e-mail to: mirencia-at-tlabs.ac.za with copy to przybylowicz-at-tlabs.ac.za For some information of the laboratory, visit our website: www.tlabs.ac.za
I suggest that you contact me for any details of this position. E-mail: przybylowicz-at-tlabs.ac.za You may want to read the following publication on earlier work done by our team in this direction:
Grzegorz Tylko, Jolanta Mesjasz-Przybyłowicz and Wojciech J. Przybyłowicz. X-ray microanalysis of biological material in the frozen-hydrated state by PIXE. Microscopy Research and Technique (2007) 70: 55-68.
I have a TEM project, where the researcher wants to observe their monolayer cell culture and the calcium crystals produced by those cells. The cells produce extracellular calcium crystals which dissolve readily in water. The usual fixation, post-fix, dehydration steps won't work . This situation is unlike anything I have dealt with before, including all my years of working with marine invertebrates. I am speculating that cryo methods may be the only answer. As always thanks in advance for any help possible.
Tom Bargar University of Nebraska Medical Center Core Electron Microscopy Research Facility 986395 Nebraska Medical Center Omaha, NE 68198-6395 402-559-7347 tbargar-at-unmc.edu
==============================Original Headers============================== 5, 20 -- From tbargar-at-unmc.edu Mon Jan 12 10:58:03 2009 5, 20 -- Received: from zixvpm02.unmc.edu (zixvpm02.unmc.edu [192.198.54.127]) 5, 20 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0CGw3WY025453 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:58:03 -0600 5, 20 -- Received: from zixvpm02.unmc.edu (ZixVPM [127.0.0.1]) 5, 20 -- by Outbound.unmc.edu (Proprietary) with ESMTP id C8AFDA0076 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:58:02 -0600 (CST) 5, 20 -- Received: from unmcnotes01.unmc.edu (host-137-197-103-35.unmc.edu [137.197.103.35]) 5, 20 -- by zixvpm02.unmc.edu (Proprietary) with ESMTP id A012539804F 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:58:00 -0600 (CST) 5, 20 -- Subject: TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium 5, 20 -- To: Microscopy-at-microscopy.com 5, 20 -- X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 7.0.1 January 17, 2006 5, 20 -- Message-ID: {OF54FCB24C.7A37982B-ON8625753C.005CDA02-8625753C.005D334C-at-unmc.edu} 5, 20 -- From: Tom W Bargar {tbargar-at-unmc.edu} 5, 20 -- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:59:08 -0600 5, 20 -- X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on UNMCNOTES01.UNMC.EDU/Servers/UNEBR at 01/12/2009 10:59:09 5, 20 -- AM 5, 20 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 5, 20 -- Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII ==============================End of - Headers==============================
The obvious question would seem to be "How do the extracellular calcium crystals survive in aqueous tissue culture medium?" Are you sure they are dissolving or simply being washed away.
Thomas E. Phillips, Ph.D Professor of Biological Sciences Chair, MU Faculty Council Director, Molecular Cytology Core 2 Tucker Hall University of Missouri Columbia, MO 65211-7400 573-882-4712 (office) 573-882-0123 (fax) phillipst-at-missouri.edu
-----Original Message----- X-from: tbargar-at-unmc.edu [mailto:tbargar-at-unmc.edu] Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 10:59 AM To: Phillips, Thomas E.
Listers,
I have a TEM project, where the researcher wants to observe their monolayer cell culture and the calcium crystals produced by those cells. The cells produce extracellular calcium crystals which dissolve readily in water. The usual fixation, post-fix, dehydration steps won't work . This situation is unlike anything I have dealt with before, including all my years of working with marine invertebrates. I am speculating that cryo methods may be the only answer. As always thanks in advance for any help possible.
Tom Bargar University of Nebraska Medical Center Core Electron Microscopy Research Facility 986395 Nebraska Medical Center Omaha, NE 68198-6395 402-559-7347 tbargar-at-unmc.edu
==============================Original Headers============================== 5, 20 -- From tbargar-at-unmc.edu Mon Jan 12 10:58:03 2009 5, 20 -- Received: from zixvpm02.unmc.edu (zixvpm02.unmc.edu [192.198.54.127]) 5, 20 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0CGw3WY025453 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:58:03 -0600 5, 20 -- Received: from zixvpm02.unmc.edu (ZixVPM [127.0.0.1]) 5, 20 -- by Outbound.unmc.edu (Proprietary) with ESMTP id C8AFDA0076 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:58:02 -0600 (CST) 5, 20 -- Received: from unmcnotes01.unmc.edu (host-137-197-103-35.unmc.edu [137.197.103.35]) 5, 20 -- by zixvpm02.unmc.edu (Proprietary) with ESMTP id A012539804F 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:58:00 -0600 (CST) 5, 20 -- Subject: TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium 5, 20 -- To: Microscopy-at-microscopy.com 5, 20 -- X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 7.0.1 January 17, 2006 5, 20 -- Message-ID: {OF54FCB24C.7A37982B-ON8625753C.005CDA02-8625753C.005D334C-at-unmc.edu} 5, 20 -- From: Tom W Bargar {tbargar-at-unmc.edu} 5, 20 -- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:59:08 -0600 5, 20 -- X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on UNMCNOTES01.UNMC.EDU/Servers/UNEBR at 01/12/2009 10:59:09 5, 20 -- AM 5, 20 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 5, 20 -- Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII ==============================End of - Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 14, 29 -- From PhillipsT-at-missouri.edu Mon Jan 12 11:06:11 2009 14, 29 -- Received: from mxnip01-missouri-out.um.umsystem.edu (mxnip01-missouri-out.um.umsystem.edu [209.106.229.53]) 14, 29 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0CH6BPt006584 14, 29 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:06:11 -0600 14, 29 -- X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true 14, 29 -- X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEAM8Ga0nRauUp/2dsb2JhbADITQ0BCYUihUsBhD+BLw 14, 29 -- Received: from unknown (HELO um-nsmtpout1.um.umsystem.edu) ([209.106.229.41]) 14, 29 -- by mxnip01-missouri-out.um.umsystem.edu with ESMTP; 12 Jan 2009 11:06:11 -0600 14, 29 -- Received: from UM-XMAIL06.um.umsystem.edu ([209.106.228.32]) by um-nsmtpout1.um.umsystem.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); 14, 29 -- Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:06:11 -0600 14, 29 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 14, 29 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message 14, 29 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 14, 29 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 14, 29 -- charset="us-ascii" 14, 29 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium 14, 29 -- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:06:10 -0600 14, 29 -- Message-ID: {0510DC719E56F64BB2AD84EE64CE6BAD05BBD766-at-UM-XMAIL06.um.umsystem.edu} 14, 29 -- In-Reply-To: {200901121659.n0CGx0wY026584-at-ns.microscopy.com} 14, 29 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: 14, 29 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 14, 29 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium 14, 29 -- thread-index: Acl01xIfWxQoeHbdTM+DDiefgUiB8QAANJ1w 14, 29 -- References: {200901121659.n0CGx0wY026584-at-ns.microscopy.com} 14, 29 -- From: "Phillips, Thomas E." {PhillipsT-at-missouri.edu} 14, 29 -- To: {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 14, 29 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jan 2009 17:06:11.0130 (UTC) FILETIME=[117359A0:01C974D8] 14, 29 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 14, 29 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n0CH6BPt006584 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
On Jan 9, 2009, at 4:07 PM, beaurega-at-westol.com wrote:
} Someone strongly pointed out that U is an alpha emitter, not a gamma } emitter, and I was not reading gamma radiation (but I was). You } pointed } out that it was the decay impurities that were the gamma emitters } and that } was what I was reading on my counter. I agree that U-238 and DU are } still } radioactive.
} Here's my favorite. "depleted uranium is 40% less radioactive than } natural } uranium." That means 60% of the radioactivity is still there. I am } not } sure that includes gamma but probably.
Dear Paul, Since the activities of the U isotopes are inversely proportional to their half-lives, and since the half lives of U235 and U234 are about 7 and 20,000 times shorter respectively than U238's, the amount of radiation from U234 is about equal to that from U238, and that from U235 is about 5% of that from the others, so your quote that DU has only 60% the activity of natural U checks out. I pointed out that ~1/4 of the U238 decays are to an excited state of Th234, which is ~50 keV above the ground state, so pure U238 will produce some low-energy gammas, as will many of the daughters. The bottom line is that direct measurements performed correctly don't lie, so they are the best way to settle this issue once and for all. Yours, Bill Tivol, PhD EM Scientist Ultrafast EM Facility Noyes Laboratory, MC 127-72 California Institute of Technology Pasadena CA 91125 (626) 395-8833 tivol-at-caltech.edu
==============================Original Headers============================== 7, 22 -- From tivol-at-caltech.edu Mon Jan 12 11:20:46 2009 7, 22 -- Received: from outgoing-mail.its.caltech.edu (outgoing-mail.its.caltech.edu [131.215.239.19]) 7, 22 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0CHKj7C020231 7, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:20:46 -0600 7, 22 -- Received: from earth-doxen.imss.caltech.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) 7, 22 -- by earth-doxen-postvirus (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95B5766E1E4F 7, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 09:20:45 -0800 (PST) 7, 22 -- X-Spam-Scanned: at Caltech-IMSS on earth-doxen by amavisd-new 7, 22 -- Received: from DHCP-19-146.caltech.edu (DHCP-19-146.caltech.edu [131.215.19.146]) 7, 22 -- by earth-doxen-ssl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E59866E2F4D 7, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 09:20:44 -0800 (PST) 7, 22 -- Message-Id: {C463CBB1-CCFF-43DE-A64B-E5D1522D3FA8-at-caltech.edu} 7, 22 -- From: Bill Tivol {tivol-at-caltech.edu} 7, 22 -- To: microscopy-at-microscopy.com 7, 22 -- In-Reply-To: {200901100007.n0A07fpE026798-at-ns.microscopy.com} 7, 22 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes 7, 22 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 7, 22 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) 7, 22 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] Re: viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters 7, 22 -- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 09:20:42 -0800 7, 22 -- References: {200901100007.n0A07fpE026798-at-ns.microscopy.com} 7, 22 -- X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) ==============================End of - Headers==============================
I have been searching around for some time and I have not been able to find a supplier with any Nanoplast (melamine) resin. Does anyone know what company actually produced Nanoplast, if they are still operating, or if there is a supplier who still has some?
Thanks,
Kasim Sader
---------------------- Dr Kasim Sader SuperSTEM Daresbury Laboratory Warrington WA4 4AD
==============================Original Headers============================== 10, 30 -- From K.Sader-at-leeds.ac.uk Mon Jan 12 11:56:48 2009 10, 30 -- Received: from mhost03c.leeds.ac.uk (mhost03c.leeds.ac.uk [129.11.76.167]) 10, 30 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0CHulM7002354 10, 30 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:56:48 -0600 10, 30 -- Received: from APOLLO1.ds.leeds.ac.uk (apollo1.leeds.ac.uk [129.11.5.4]) 10, 30 -- by mhost03c.leeds.ac.uk (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n0CHukS2019389 10, 30 -- (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) 10, 30 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:56:46 GMT 10, 30 -- Received: from dexbr1.ds.leeds.ac.uk (129.11.76.19) by APOLLO1.ds.leeds.ac.uk 10, 30 -- (129.11.5.4) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.1.311.2; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10, 30 -- 17:56:45 +0000 10, 30 -- Received: from HERMES4.ds.leeds.ac.uk ([129.11.5.130]) by 10, 30 -- dexbr1.ds.leeds.ac.uk with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 12 Jan 10, 30 -- 2009 17:56:45 +0000 10, 30 -- Received: from 129.11.40.48 ([129.11.40.48]) by HERMES4.ds.leeds.ac.uk 10, 30 -- ([129.11.5.131]) via Exchange Front-End Server outlook.leeds.ac.uk 10, 30 -- ([129.11.5.3]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10, 30 -- 17:56:45 +0000 10, 30 -- User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.4.0.080122 10, 30 -- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:56:44 +0000 10, 30 -- Subject: Nanoplast resin 10, 30 -- From: Kasim Sader {k.sader-at-leeds.ac.uk} 10, 30 -- To: {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} 10, 30 -- Message-ID: {C59134DC.619C%k.sader-at-leeds.ac.uk} 10, 30 -- Thread-Topic: Nanoplast resin 10, 30 -- Thread-Index: Acl03yEuX9NSRODSEd218gAZ4zduOA== 10, 30 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 10, 30 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" 10, 30 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 10, 30 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jan 2009 17:56:45.0245 (UTC) FILETIME=[21EC8ED0:01C974DF] ==============================End of - Headers==============================
Ca products will either dissolve or wash away, but will disappear from the external and internal areas of the cells during aqueous sample preparation.You really can't avoid this happening. The only way to minimize the amount of dissolving (but not necessarily washing away if external) of the Ca product is using HPF and FS.
I say this based on personal experience with internal calcium carbonate inclusions in cells.
Debby
-- Debby Sherman, Director Phone: 765-494-6666 Life Science Microscopy Facility FAX: 765-494-5896 Purdue University E-mail: dsherman-at-purdue.edu S-052 Whistler Building 170 S. University Street West Lafayette, IN 47907 http://www.agriculture.purdue.edu/microscopy/
} From: {tbargar-at-unmc.edu} } Reply-To: {tbargar-at-unmc.edu} } Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:00:03 -0600 } To: Debby Sherman {dsherman-at-purdue.edu} } Subject: [Microscopy] TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium } } } } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } } Listers, } } I have a TEM project, where the researcher wants to observe their monolayer } cell culture and the calcium crystals produced by those cells. The cells } produce extracellular calcium crystals which dissolve readily in water. } The usual fixation, post-fix, dehydration steps won't work . This situation } is unlike anything I have dealt with before, including all my years of } working with marine invertebrates. I am speculating that cryo methods may } be the only answer. As always thanks in advance for any help possible. } } Tom Bargar } University of Nebraska Medical Center } Core Electron Microscopy Research Facility } 986395 Nebraska Medical Center } Omaha, NE 68198-6395 } 402-559-7347 } tbargar-at-unmc.edu } } } ==============================Original Headers============================== } 5, 20 -- From tbargar-at-unmc.edu Mon Jan 12 10:58:03 2009 } 5, 20 -- Received: from zixvpm02.unmc.edu (zixvpm02.unmc.edu [192.198.54.127]) } 5, 20 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id } n0CGw3WY025453 } 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:58:03 -0600 } 5, 20 -- Received: from zixvpm02.unmc.edu (ZixVPM [127.0.0.1]) } 5, 20 -- by Outbound.unmc.edu (Proprietary) with ESMTP id C8AFDA0076 } 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:58:02 -0600 } (CST) } 5, 20 -- Received: from unmcnotes01.unmc.edu (host-137-197-103-35.unmc.edu } [137.197.103.35]) } 5, 20 -- by zixvpm02.unmc.edu (Proprietary) with ESMTP id A012539804F } 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:58:00 -0600 } (CST) } 5, 20 -- Subject: TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium } 5, 20 -- To: Microscopy-at-microscopy.com } 5, 20 -- X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 7.0.1 January 17, 2006 } 5, 20 -- Message-ID: } {OF54FCB24C.7A37982B-ON8625753C.005CDA02-8625753C.005D334C-at-unmc.edu} } 5, 20 -- From: Tom W Bargar {tbargar-at-unmc.edu} } 5, 20 -- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:59:08 -0600 } 5, 20 -- X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on } UNMCNOTES01.UNMC.EDU/Servers/UNEBR at 01/12/2009 10:59:09 } 5, 20 -- AM } 5, 20 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 } 5, 20 -- Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII } ==============================End of - Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 8, 30 -- From dsherman-at-purdue.edu Mon Jan 12 11:57:57 2009 8, 30 -- Received: from mailhub131.itcs.purdue.edu (mailhub131.itcs.purdue.edu [128.210.5.131]) 8, 30 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0CHvvYQ004818 8, 30 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:57:57 -0600 8, 30 -- Received: from mailhub126.itcs.purdue.edu (mailhub126.itcs.purdue.edu [128.210.5.126]) 8, 30 -- by mailhub131.itcs.purdue.edu (8.14.2/8.14.2/smtp-nopmx) with ESMTP id n0CHvvA5020838 8, 30 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:57:57 -0500 8, 30 -- Received: from 1061exfe04a.itap.purdue.edu (1061exfe04a.itap.purdue.edu [128.210.1.11]) 8, 30 -- by mailhub126.itcs.purdue.edu (8.14.2/8.14.2/exchange-outbound) with ESMTP id n0CHvvne000488 8, 30 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:57:57 -0500 8, 30 -- Received: from exch04.purdue.lcl ([172.21.6.24]) by 1061exfe04a.itap.purdue.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); 8, 30 -- Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:57:56 -0500 8, 30 -- Received: from 128.210.161.94 ([128.210.161.94]) by EXCH04.purdue.lcl ([172.21.6.26]) via Exchange Front-End Server exchange.purdue.edu ([128.210.1.10]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; 8, 30 -- Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:57:08 +0000 8, 30 -- User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.15.0.081119 8, 30 -- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:57:07 -0500 8, 30 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium 8, 30 -- From: Debby Sherman {dsherman-at-purdue.edu} 8, 30 -- To: {tbargar-at-unmc.edu} , "message to: MSA list" {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 8, 30 -- Message-ID: {C590EEA3.38C43%dsherman-at-exchange.purdue.edu} 8, 30 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium 8, 30 -- Thread-Index: Acl03y7ktOL8Rky8Tk6hZdzF0JB74Q== 8, 30 -- In-Reply-To: {200901121700.n0CH03iD028637-at-ns.microscopy.com} 8, 30 -- Mime-version: 1.0 8, 30 -- Content-type: text/plain; 8, 30 -- charset="US-ASCII" 8, 30 -- Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit 8, 30 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jan 2009 17:57:56.0527 (UTC) FILETIME=[4C6953F0:01C974DF] 8, 30 -- X-PMX-Version: 5.4.0.320885 8, 30 -- X-PerlMx-Virus-Scanned: Yes ==============================End of - Headers==============================
It's a long shot, but there are non-aqueous fixation techniques that were originally developed to preserve biofilms that are usually removed during conventional processing methods. These use a perfluorocarbon solvent, such as the 3M company's FC-72, with osmium tetroxide to do the fixation. If the calcium crystals will survive ethanol dehydration, it may work. If not, it may be possible to experiment with ways of getting the cells into resin directly from the solvent. Depends on how much fuss you want to go through on a long-shot protocol!
One reference is: "Heterogeneity of the Composition and Thickness of Tracheal Mucus in Rats", 1997, David Sims and Margaret Horne, Am J Phys--Lung Cell & Mol Phsiol 17:L1036-L1041.
I can come up with more if you want to pursue this. 3M used to sell this solvent in small quantities, although it's normally sold in drums for electrical transformers, etc. Don't know if they still have the smaller units.
For what it's worth...
Good luck, Randy
Randy Tindall Senior EM Specialist Electron Microscopy Core Facility---We Do Small Well! W125 Veterinary Medicine University of Missouri Columbia, MO 65211 Tel: (573) 882-8304 Fax: (573) 884-2227 Email: tindallr-at-missouri.edu Web: http://www.emc.missouri.edu On-line calendar: http://biotech.rnet.missouri.edu/cgi-bin/Calcium310.pl?Op=Splash&Amount= Week&NavType=Both&Type=TimePlan Sons of Norway: http://www.sofn.com
-----Original Message----- X-from: tbargar-at-unmc.edu [mailto:tbargar-at-unmc.edu] Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 10:59 AM To: Tindall, Randy D.
Listers,
I have a TEM project, where the researcher wants to observe their monolayer cell culture and the calcium crystals produced by those cells. The cells produce extracellular calcium crystals which dissolve readily in water. The usual fixation, post-fix, dehydration steps won't work . This situation is unlike anything I have dealt with before, including all my years of working with marine invertebrates. I am speculating that cryo methods may be the only answer. As always thanks in advance for any help possible.
Tom Bargar University of Nebraska Medical Center Core Electron Microscopy Research Facility 986395 Nebraska Medical Center Omaha, NE 68198-6395 402-559-7347 tbargar-at-unmc.edu
==============================Original Headers============================== 5, 20 -- From tbargar-at-unmc.edu Mon Jan 12 10:58:03 2009 5, 20 -- Received: from zixvpm02.unmc.edu (zixvpm02.unmc.edu [192.198.54.127]) 5, 20 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0CGw3WY025453 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:58:03 -0600 5, 20 -- Received: from zixvpm02.unmc.edu (ZixVPM [127.0.0.1]) 5, 20 -- by Outbound.unmc.edu (Proprietary) with ESMTP id C8AFDA0076 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:58:02 -0600 (CST) 5, 20 -- Received: from unmcnotes01.unmc.edu (host-137-197-103-35.unmc.edu [137.197.103.35]) 5, 20 -- by zixvpm02.unmc.edu (Proprietary) with ESMTP id A012539804F 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:58:00 -0600 (CST) 5, 20 -- Subject: TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium 5, 20 -- To: Microscopy-at-microscopy.com 5, 20 -- X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 7.0.1 January 17, 2006 5, 20 -- Message-ID: {OF54FCB24C.7A37982B-ON8625753C.005CDA02-8625753C.005D334C-at-unmc.edu} 5, 20 -- From: Tom W Bargar {tbargar-at-unmc.edu} 5, 20 -- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:59:08 -0600 5, 20 -- X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on UNMCNOTES01.UNMC.EDU/Servers/UNEBR at 01/12/2009 10:59:09 5, 20 -- AM 5, 20 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 5, 20 -- Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII ==============================End of - Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 24, 30 -- From TindallR-at-missouri.edu Mon Jan 12 12:52:48 2009 24, 30 -- Received: from mxnip01-missouri-out.um.umsystem.edu (mxnip01-missouri-out.um.umsystem.edu [209.106.229.53]) 24, 30 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0CIqmZF030867 24, 30 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:52:48 -0600 24, 30 -- X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true 24, 30 -- X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApoEANMga0nRauUo/2dsb2JhbADIdg0BCYU9hXCEQIEvhDI 24, 30 -- Received: from unknown (HELO um-tsmtpout1.um.umsystem.edu) ([209.106.229.40]) 24, 30 -- by mxnip01-mizzou-out.um.umsystem.edu with ESMTP; 12 Jan 2009 12:52:45 -0600 24, 30 -- Received: from UM-XMAIL08.um.umsystem.edu ([209.106.228.34]) by um-tsmtpout1.um.umsystem.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); 24, 30 -- Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:52:45 -0600 24, 30 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 24, 30 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message 24, 30 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 24, 30 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 24, 30 -- charset="us-ascii" 24, 30 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium 24, 30 -- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 12:52:45 -0600 24, 30 -- Message-ID: {91108EF9255B394CBF8B7E3789814A4103CD7CE0-at-UM-XMAIL08.um.umsystem.edu} 24, 30 -- In-Reply-To: {200901121659.n0CGxESU027070-at-ns.microscopy.com} 24, 30 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: 24, 30 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 24, 30 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium 24, 30 -- thread-index: Acl01xlVhTneargmT7eRSno8qDklvwADa9Ug 24, 30 -- References: {200901121659.n0CGxESU027070-at-ns.microscopy.com} 24, 30 -- From: "Tindall, Randy D." {TindallR-at-missouri.edu} 24, 30 -- To: {tbargar-at-unmc.edu} 24, 30 -- Cc: {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 24, 30 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jan 2009 18:52:45.0431 (UTC) FILETIME=[F4C04070:01C974E6] 24, 30 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 24, 30 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n0CIqmZF030867 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
Sounds like rapid freezing followed by freeze substitution is probably the way to go (as Debby Sherman suggested).
If you do not have access to such equipment, another possibility would be to grow the cells directly on a TEM grid (with a Formvar film, of course). Cu grids may be toxic to some cells but Ni should be OK. We've grown cells on grids in the past and it works well once you work out the concentration of cells (so as not to obliterate the view).
In our situation, we rinsed to remove culture fluids but you could plunge freeze the grid and freeze dry it. We made a freeze dryer (of sorts) by having a copper block machined to accommodate specimens. It had a lid (to prevent condensation). We loaded the specimens into the LN2-chilled block and then put it in a vacuum evaporator. In your case, 8 hr should dry the grid.
JB
} I have a TEM project, where the researcher wants to observe their monolayer } cell culture and the calcium crystals produced by those cells. The cells } produce extracellular calcium crystals which dissolve readily in water. } The usual fixation, post-fix, dehydration steps won't work . This situation } is unlike anything I have dealt with before, including all my years of } working with marine invertebrates. I am speculating that cryo methods may } be the only answer. As always thanks in advance for any help possible. } } Tom Bargar } University of Nebraska Medical Center }
John J. Bozzola, Ph.D., Director Integrated Microscopy & Graphics Expertise (IMAGE) Southern Illinois University 750 Communications Drive - MC 4402 Carbondale, IL 62901 Telephone: 618-453-3730
Tom - Just FYI: I used the non-aqueous method mentioned by Randy several years ago, and it worked well for preserving the mucous layer on murine intestinal tissue. The reference he suggested is a good start. Also, if you call 3M, they may send you a sample bottle of Fluorinert FC-72, which may be enough for your needs (and was enough for me to do a trial run to ensure that the fixation worked).
Jessica
Jessica Cervantes Bend Research, Inc Bend, OR
Disclaimer: views expressed in this email are that of the sender and are not necessarily reflective of Bend Research. This email is intended for the addressee(s) only, and unauthorized access is prohibited. ____________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---- The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America
Tom,
It's a long shot, but there are non-aqueous fixation techniques that were originally developed to preserve biofilms that are usually removed during conventional processing methods. These use a perfluorocarbon solvent, such as the 3M company's FC-72, with osmium tetroxide to do the fixation. If the calcium crystals will survive ethanol dehydration, it may work. If not, it may be possible to experiment with ways of getting the cells into resin directly from the solvent. Depends on how much fuss you want to go through on a long-shot protocol!
One reference is: "Heterogeneity of the Composition and Thickness of Tracheal Mucus in Rats", 1997, David Sims and Margaret Horne, Am J Phys--Lung Cell & Mol Phsiol 17:L1036-L1041.
I can come up with more if you want to pursue this. 3M used to sell this solvent in small quantities, although it's normally sold in drums for electrical transformers, etc. Don't know if they still have the smaller units.
For what it's worth...
Good luck, Randy
Randy Tindall Senior EM Specialist Electron Microscopy Core Facility---We Do Small Well! W125 Veterinary Medicine University of Missouri Columbia, MO 65211 Tel: (573) 882-8304 Fax: (573) 884-2227 Email: tindallr-at-missouri.edu Web: http://www.emc.missouri.edu On-line calendar: http://biotech.rnet.missouri.edu/cgi-bin/Calcium310.pl?Op=Splash&Amount= Week&NavType=Both&Type=TimePlan Sons of Norway: http://www.sofn.com
-----Original Message----- X-from: tbargar-at-unmc.edu [mailto:tbargar-at-unmc.edu] Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 10:59 AM To: Tindall, Randy D.
Listers,
I have a TEM project, where the researcher wants to observe their monolayer cell culture and the calcium crystals produced by those cells. The cells produce extracellular calcium crystals which dissolve readily in water. The usual fixation, post-fix, dehydration steps won't work . This situation is unlike anything I have dealt with before, including all my years of working with marine invertebrates. I am speculating that cryo methods may be the only answer. As always thanks in advance for any help possible.
Tom Bargar University of Nebraska Medical Center Core Electron Microscopy Research Facility 986395 Nebraska Medical Center Omaha, NE 68198-6395 402-559-7347 tbargar-at-unmc.edu
==============================Original Headers============================== 32, 22 -- From cervantes-at-bendres.com Mon Jan 12 13:35:22 2009 32, 22 -- Received: from smtp.bendres.com (smtp.bendres.com [67.59.84.113]) 32, 22 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0CJZLnf026911 32, 22 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:35:22 -0600 32, 22 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message 32, 22 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 32, 22 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 32, 22 -- charset="us-ascii" 32, 22 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 32, 22 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] RE: TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium - non-aqueous fixation 32, 22 -- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:35:19 -0800 32, 22 -- Message-ID: {82C755170EE5C44BA26E35A7F6B3864A040C29-at-dixie.bri.local} 32, 22 -- In-Reply-To: {200901121856.n0CIuwoH006559-at-ns.microscopy.com} 32, 22 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: 32, 22 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 32, 22 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] RE: TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium - non-aqueous fixation 32, 22 -- Thread-Index: Acl054ygcHZ11egoRkyDVWjg+NhE+wAA3RtA 32, 22 -- References: {200901121856.n0CIuwoH006559-at-ns.microscopy.com} 32, 22 -- From: "Cervantes, Jessica" {cervantes-at-bendres.com} 32, 22 -- To: {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 32, 22 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 32, 22 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n0CJZLnf026911 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
There was an old paper about anhydrous specimen preparation for TEM: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/66323
Method used ethylene glycol, cellosolve and propylene oxide. Embedded in Epon specimens were cut with knife filled with ethylene glycol. A while ago I used this method and got some results.
Vladimir
Vladimir M. Dusevich, Ph.D. Electron Microscope Lab Manager 371 School of Dentistry 650 E. 25th Street Kansas City, MO 64108-2784
} -----Original Message----- } From: tbargar-at-unmc.edu [mailto:tbargar-at-unmc.edu] } Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 10:59 AM } To: Dusevich, Vladimir } Subject: [Microscopy] TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium } } } } } -------------------------------------------------------------- } -------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy } Society of America To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } -------------------------------------------------------------- } -------------- } } } Listers, } } I have a TEM project, where the researcher wants to observe } their monolayer cell culture and the calcium crystals } produced by those cells. The cells produce extracellular } calcium crystals which dissolve readily in water. } The usual fixation, post-fix, dehydration steps won't work . } This situation is unlike anything I have dealt with before, } including all my years of working with marine invertebrates. } I am speculating that cryo methods may be the only answer. } As always thanks in advance for any help possible. } } Tom Bargar } University of Nebraska Medical Center } Core Electron Microscopy Research Facility } 986395 Nebraska Medical Center } Omaha, NE 68198-6395 } 402-559-7347 } tbargar-at-unmc.edu } } } ==============================Original } Headers============================== } 5, 20 -- From tbargar-at-unmc.edu Mon Jan 12 10:58:03 2009 5, 20 } -- Received: from zixvpm02.unmc.edu (zixvpm02.unmc.edu } [192.198.54.127]) } 5, 20 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) } with ESMTP id n0CGw3WY025453 } 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan } 2009 10:58:03 -0600 } 5, 20 -- Received: from zixvpm02.unmc.edu (ZixVPM [127.0.0.1]) } 5, 20 -- by Outbound.unmc.edu (Proprietary) with ESMTP } id C8AFDA0076 } 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan } 2009 10:58:02 -0600 (CST) } 5, 20 -- Received: from unmcnotes01.unmc.edu } (host-137-197-103-35.unmc.edu [137.197.103.35]) } 5, 20 -- by zixvpm02.unmc.edu (Proprietary) with ESMTP } id A012539804F } 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan } 2009 10:58:00 -0600 (CST) } 5, 20 -- Subject: TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium } 5, 20 -- To: Microscopy-at-microscopy.com 5, 20 -- X-Mailer: } Lotus Notes Release 7.0.1 January 17, 2006 5, 20 -- } Message-ID: } {OF54FCB24C.7A37982B-ON8625753C.005CDA02-8625753C.005D334C-at-unmc.edu} } 5, 20 -- From: Tom W Bargar {tbargar-at-unmc.edu} 5, 20 -- Date: } Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:59:08 -0600 5, 20 -- X-MIMETrack: } Serialize by Router on UNMCNOTES01.UNMC.EDU/Servers/UNEBR at } 01/12/2009 10:59:09 5, 20 -- AM 5, 20 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 } 5, 20 -- Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII } ==============================End of - } Headers============================== } }
==============================Original Headers============================== 8, 26 -- From DusevichV-at-umkc.edu Mon Jan 12 14:15:43 2009 8, 26 -- Received: from kc-msxproto3.kc.umkc.edu (kc-msxproto3.kc.umkc.edu [134.193.44.10]) 8, 26 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0CKFhDZ009316 8, 26 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:15:43 -0600 8, 26 -- Received: from KC-MSX1.kc.umkc.edu ([134.193.32.11]) by kc-msxproto3.kc.umkc.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); 8, 26 -- Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:15:42 -0600 8, 26 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 8, 26 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message 8, 26 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 8, 26 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 8, 26 -- charset="us-ascii" 8, 26 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium 8, 26 -- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:15:42 -0600 8, 26 -- Message-ID: {032EC4F75A527A4FA58C5B1B5DECFBB3062CB7AC-at-KC-MSX1.kc.umkc.edu} 8, 26 -- In-Reply-To: {200901121658.n0CGwj2i026350-at-ns.microscopy.com} 8, 26 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: 8, 26 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 8, 26 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium 8, 26 -- thread-index: Acl01wj0f9lD3FrtTi+bEOThxFeWogAGlcKA 8, 26 -- References: {200901121658.n0CGwj2i026350-at-ns.microscopy.com} 8, 26 -- From: "Dusevich, Vladimir" {DusevichV-at-umkc.edu} 8, 26 -- To: {tbargar-at-unmc.edu} , {microscopy-at-msa.microscopy.com} , 8, 26 -- {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 8, 26 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jan 2009 20:15:42.0772 (UTC) FILETIME=[8B7A3740:01C974F2] 8, 26 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 8, 26 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n0CKFhDZ009316 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
My ancient files have yielded a manufacturer for NANOPLAST FB 101. Google Rolf Bachhuber and a 2002 paper comes up with manufacturer in Germany. I'd type it out but my typing isn't to be trusted.
A publication from 'Agar Scientific' in May 1990 has references about melamine resins. That company was in the U.K. at the time.
I have an old Nanoplast kit from Polyscience in the U.S. I know they don't do any manufacturing and I have no idea if they still carry it.
Good luck,
Grete Adamson EM Med Path U.C. Davis
-----Original Message----- X-from: k.sader-at-leeds.ac.uk [mailto:k.sader-at-leeds.ac.uk] Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 10:05 AM To: Adamson, Grete
Hi,
I have been searching around for some time and I have not been able to find a supplier with any Nanoplast (melamine) resin. Does anyone know what company actually produced Nanoplast, if they are still operating, or if there is a supplier who still has some?
Thanks,
Kasim Sader
---------------------- Dr Kasim Sader SuperSTEM Daresbury Laboratory Warrington WA4 4AD
==============================Original Headers============================== 10, 30 -- From K.Sader-at-leeds.ac.uk Mon Jan 12 11:56:48 2009 10, 30 -- Received: from mhost03c.leeds.ac.uk (mhost03c.leeds.ac.uk [129.11.76.167]) 10, 30 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0CHulM7002354 10, 30 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 11:56:48 -0600 10, 30 -- Received: from APOLLO1.ds.leeds.ac.uk (apollo1.leeds.ac.uk [129.11.5.4]) 10, 30 -- by mhost03c.leeds.ac.uk (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n0CHukS2019389 10, 30 -- (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT) 10, 30 -- for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:56:46 GMT 10, 30 -- Received: from dexbr1.ds.leeds.ac.uk (129.11.76.19) by APOLLO1.ds.leeds.ac.uk 10, 30 -- (129.11.5.4) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.1.311.2; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10, 30 -- 17:56:45 +0000 10, 30 -- Received: from HERMES4.ds.leeds.ac.uk ([129.11.5.130]) by 10, 30 -- dexbr1.ds.leeds.ac.uk with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Mon, 12 Jan 10, 30 -- 2009 17:56:45 +0000 10, 30 -- Received: from 129.11.40.48 ([129.11.40.48]) by HERMES4.ds.leeds.ac.uk 10, 30 -- ([129.11.5.131]) via Exchange Front-End Server outlook.leeds.ac.uk 10, 30 -- ([129.11.5.3]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10, 30 -- 17:56:45 +0000 10, 30 -- User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/11.4.0.080122 10, 30 -- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:56:44 +0000 10, 30 -- Subject: Nanoplast resin 10, 30 -- From: Kasim Sader {k.sader-at-leeds.ac.uk} 10, 30 -- To: {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} 10, 30 -- Message-ID: {C59134DC.619C%k.sader-at-leeds.ac.uk} 10, 30 -- Thread-Topic: Nanoplast resin 10, 30 -- Thread-Index: Acl03yEuX9NSRODSEd218gAZ4zduOA== 10, 30 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 10, 30 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" 10, 30 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 10, 30 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jan 2009 17:56:45.0245 (UTC) FILETIME=[21EC8ED0:01C974DF] ==============================End of - Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 23, 25 -- From gnadamson-at-ucdavis.edu Mon Jan 12 15:26:03 2009 23, 25 -- Received: from Mail.ucdsom.ucdavis.edu (mail.ucdsom.ucdavis.edu [169.237.87.32]) 23, 25 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0CLQ3pf024857 23, 25 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 15:26:03 -0600 23, 25 -- Received: from Mail.ucdsom.ucdavis.edu ([169.237.87.32]) by 23, 25 -- Mail.ucdsom.ucdavis.edu ([169.237.87.32]) with mapi; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 23, 25 -- 13:26:29 -0800 23, 25 -- From: "Adamson, Grete" {gnadamson-at-ucdavis.edu} 23, 25 -- To: "'microscopy-at-microscopy.com'" {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 23, 25 -- CC: "'k.sader-at-leeds.ac.uk'" {k.sader-at-leeds.ac.uk} 23, 25 -- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:26:29 -0800 23, 25 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] Nanoplast resin 23, 25 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] Nanoplast resin 23, 25 -- Thread-Index: Acl04FtAL+NoPsEYRYC3hsNvOUTuBQAGnZoA 23, 25 -- Message-ID: {FAB730F779268A468497EFF961DBBE11BA914134AD-at-Mail.ucdsom.ucdavis.edu} 23, 25 -- In-Reply-To: {200901121804.n0CI4qU1028997-at-ns.microscopy.com} 23, 25 -- Accept-Language: en-US 23, 25 -- Content-Language: en-US 23, 25 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: 23, 25 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 23, 25 -- acceptlanguage: en-US 23, 25 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" 23, 25 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 23, 25 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 23, 25 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n0CLQ3pf024857 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
This is a message I never thought I would be sending.
We are getting out of the film and paper photo business, and have a lot of 'stuff' to give away or send to the landfill. Anyone with questions about whether digital imaging for EM is for real, let this be your wake-up call.
Most of what we have is old, probably not worth the cost to ship, unless you are desperate, or curious.
We have a bunch of old Polaroid stuff - 52, 53, 55, 331, 72, 554, 572. I don't even know what some of this was used for, if it rings your bell, let me know and I can tell you more.
We have lots of old photo paper. Polycontrast, Velox, etc. 8 x10 and 4 x5 sizes.
A little 4463 and a ton of SO-163. The SO-163 is old.
Bunch of misc. 35 mm rolls, B&W and color. Some 120 Tech Pan.
Most of this junk has been in a freezer. Some is pretty old and past its expiration date, but if you are interested, let me know and we can try to work something out. If I don't hear anything in the next week or so, its outa here.
Jon
Jonathan Krupp Delta College 5151Pacific Ave. Stockton, CA 95207 209-954-5284 jkrupp-at-deltacollege.edu
==============================Original Headers============================== 14, 42 -- From jkrupp-at-deltacollege.edu Mon Jan 12 15:59:23 2009 14, 42 -- Received: from mailin.deltacollege.edu (mailin.deltacollege.edu [207.62.178.150]) 14, 42 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with SMTP id n0CLxMKe006917 14, 42 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 15:59:23 -0600 14, 42 -- Received: from mailin.deltacollege.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) 14, 42 -- by localhost (Email Security Appliance) with SMTP id 7D4C918E05E 14, 42 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 21:34:33 +0000 (GMT) 14, 42 -- Received: from sjdccd.cc.ca.us (smtp.sjdccd.cc.ca.us [207.62.178.236]) 14, 42 -- by mailin.deltacollege.edu (Email Security Appliance) with ESMTP id 726D520CAFD 14, 42 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 21:34:33 +0000 (GMT) 14, 42 -- Received: from [207.62.178.20] (HELO sunspot.sjdccd.cc.ca.us) 14, 42 -- by sjdccd.cc.ca.us (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.9) 14, 42 -- with ESMTP id 44930245 for Microscopy-at-microscopy.com; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:59:19 -0800 14, 42 -- Received: from zmail.deltacollege.edu ([207.62.178.179]) by 14, 42 -- sunspot.sjdccd.cc.ca.us (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with 14, 42 -- ESMTP id KDDOD300.CM0 for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 14, 42 -- Jan 2009 13:43:51 -0800 14, 42 -- Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) 14, 42 -- by zmail.deltacollege.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13E398F74D38 14, 42 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:59:19 -0800 (PST) 14, 42 -- X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at 14, 42 -- X-Spam-Flag: NO 14, 42 -- X-Spam-Score: -2.324 14, 42 -- X-Spam-Level: 14, 42 -- X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.324 tagged_above=-10 required=6 tests=[AWL=0.175, 14, 42 -- BAYES_00=-2.599, RDNS_NONE=0.1] 14, 42 -- Received: from zmail.deltacollege.edu ([127.0.0.1]) 14, 42 -- by localhost (zmail.deltacollege.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) 14, 42 -- with ESMTP id sAJT+MZ3mFOx for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; 14, 42 -- Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:59:18 -0800 (PST) 14, 42 -- Received: from [172.20.4.106] (unknown [172.20.4.106]) 14, 42 -- by zmail.deltacollege.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEBE88F74D32 14, 42 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:59:18 -0800 (PST) 14, 42 -- Message-Id: {7C9F6B4C-B8AF-43D7-86A6-495112B71078-at-deltacollege.edu} 14, 42 -- From: Jon Krupp {jkrupp-at-deltacollege.edu} 14, 42 -- To: Microscopy-at-microscopy.com 14, 42 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes 14, 42 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 14, 42 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) 14, 42 -- Subject: Old film etc 14, 42 -- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:59:18 -0800 14, 42 -- X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) ==============================End of - Headers==============================
It turned out that we have a material which emits alpha, beta and gamma rays. I think the original labeling for uranyl compounds which said "alpha emitter" should be changed. Especially, for the reason that there might be microscopists who are using uranyl compounds in their labs but, do not follow the Microscopy List.
Is there anybody in this group who is in a position and willing to contact Nuclear Regulatory Commission on this subject?
Regards, Ayten.
-- =========================== Ayten Celik-Aktas, PhD Ankara University Electron Microscopy Laboratory Ankara, Turkey ===========================
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 8:26 PM, {tivol-at-caltech.edu} wrote: } } } } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy Society of America } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } } } On Jan 9, 2009, at 4:07 PM, beaurega-at-westol.com wrote: } } } Someone strongly pointed out that U is an alpha emitter, not a gamma } } emitter, and I was not reading gamma radiation (but I was). You } } pointed } } out that it was the decay impurities that were the gamma emitters } } and that } } was what I was reading on my counter. I agree that U-238 and DU are } } still } } radioactive. } } } Here's my favorite. "depleted uranium is 40% less radioactive than } } natural } } uranium." That means 60% of the radioactivity is still there. I am } } not } } sure that includes gamma but probably. } } } Dear Paul, } Since the activities of the U isotopes are inversely proportional to } their half-lives, and since the half lives of U235 and U234 are about } 7 and 20,000 times shorter respectively than U238's, the amount of } radiation from U234 is about equal to that from U238, and that from } U235 is about 5% of that from the others, so your quote that DU has } only 60% the activity of natural U checks out. I pointed out that } ~1/4 of the U238 decays are to an excited state of Th234, which is ~50 } keV above the ground state, so pure U238 will produce some low-energy } gammas, as will many of the daughters. The bottom line is that direct } measurements performed correctly don't lie, so they are the best way } to settle this issue once and for all. } Yours, } Bill Tivol, PhD } EM Scientist } Ultrafast EM Facility } Noyes Laboratory, MC 127-72 } California Institute of Technology } Pasadena CA 91125 } (626) 395-8833 } tivol-at-caltech.edu } }
How did you then dry your grids without leaving crystals?
Stéphane
----- Original Message ---- X-from: "DusevichV-at-umkc.edu" {DusevichV-at-umkc.edu} To: nizets2-at-yahoo.com Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 9:19:38 PM
There was an old paper about anhydrous specimen preparation for TEM: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/66323
Method used ethylene glycol, cellosolve and propylene oxide. Embedded in Epon specimens were cut with knife filled with ethylene glycol. A while ago I used this method and got some results.
Vladimir
Vladimir M. Dusevich, Ph.D. Electron Microscope Lab Manager 371 School of Dentistry 650 E. 25th Street Kansas City, MO 64108-2784
} -----Original Message----- } From: tbargar-at-unmc.edu [mailto:tbargar-at-unmc.edu] } Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 10:59 AM } To: Dusevich, Vladimir } Subject: [Microscopy] TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium } } } } } -------------------------------------------------------------- } -------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy } Society of America To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } -------------------------------------------------------------- } -------------- } } } Listers, } } I have a TEM project, where the researcher wants to observe } their monolayer cell culture and the calcium crystals } produced by those cells. The cells produce extracellular } calcium crystals which dissolve readily in water. } The usual fixation, post-fix, dehydration steps won't work . } This situation is unlike anything I have dealt with before, } including all my years of working with marine invertebrates. } I am speculating that cryo methods may be the only answer. } As always thanks in advance for any help possible. } } Tom Bargar } University of Nebraska Medical Center } Core Electron Microscopy Research Facility } 986395 Nebraska Medical Center } Omaha, NE 68198-6395 } 402-559-7347 } tbargar-at-unmc.edu } } } ==============================Original } Headers============================== } 5, 20 -- From tbargar-at-unmc.edu Mon Jan 12 10:58:03 2009 5, 20 } -- Received: from zixvpm02.unmc.edu (zixvpm02.unmc.edu } [192.198.54.127]) } 5, 20 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) } with ESMTP id n0CGw3WY025453 } 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan } 2009 10:58:03 -0600 } 5, 20 -- Received: from zixvpm02.unmc.edu (ZixVPM [127.0.0.1]) } 5, 20 -- by Outbound.unmc.edu (Proprietary) with ESMTP } id C8AFDA0076 } 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan } 2009 10:58:02 -0600 (CST) } 5, 20 -- Received: from unmcnotes01.unmc.edu } (host-137-197-103-35.unmc.edu [137.197.103.35]) } 5, 20 -- by zixvpm02.unmc.edu (Proprietary) with ESMTP } id A012539804F } 5, 20 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan } 2009 10:58:00 -0600 (CST) } 5, 20 -- Subject: TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium } 5, 20 -- To: Microscopy-at-microscopy.com 5, 20 -- X-Mailer: } Lotus Notes Release 7.0.1 January 17, 2006 5, 20 -- } Message-ID: } {OF54FCB24C.7A37982B-ON8625753C.005CDA02-8625753C.005D334C-at-unmc.edu} } 5, 20 -- From: Tom W Bargar {tbargar-at-unmc.edu} 5, 20 -- Date: } Mon, 12 Jan 2009 10:59:08 -0600 5, 20 -- X-MIMETrack: } Serialize by Router on UNMCNOTES01.UNMC.EDU/Servers/UNEBR at } 01/12/2009 10:59:09 5, 20 -- AM 5, 20 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 } 5, 20 -- Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII } ==============================End of - } Headers============================== } }
==============================Original Headers============================== 8, 26 -- From DusevichV-at-umkc.edu Mon Jan 12 14:15:43 2009 8, 26 -- Received: from kc-msxproto3.kc.umkc.edu (kc-msxproto3.kc.umkc.edu [134.193.44.10]) 8, 26 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0CKFhDZ009316 8, 26 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:15:43 -0600 8, 26 -- Received: from KC-MSX1.kc.umkc.edu ([134.193.32.11]) by kc-msxproto3.kc.umkc.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); 8, 26 -- Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:15:42 -0600 8, 26 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 8, 26 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message 8, 26 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 8, 26 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 8, 26 -- charset="us-ascii" 8, 26 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium 8, 26 -- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:15:42 -0600 8, 26 -- Message-ID: {032EC4F75A527A4FA58C5B1B5DECFBB3062CB7AC-at-KC-MSX1.kc.umkc.edu} 8, 26 -- In-Reply-To: {200901121658.n0CGwj2i026350-at-ns.microscopy.com} 8, 26 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: 8, 26 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 8, 26 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium 8, 26 -- thread-index: Acl01wj0f9lD3FrtTi+bEOThxFeWogAGlcKA 8, 26 -- References: {200901121658.n0CGwj2i026350-at-ns.microscopy.com} 8, 26 -- From: "Dusevich, Vladimir" {DusevichV-at-umkc.edu} 8, 26 -- To: {tbargar-at-unmc.edu} , {microscopy-at-msa.microscopy.com} , 8, 26 -- {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 8, 26 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Jan 2009 20:15:42.0772 (UTC) FILETIME=[8B7A3740:01C974F2] 8, 26 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 8, 26 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n0CKFhDZ009316 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 24, 23 -- From nizets2-at-yahoo.com Tue Jan 13 03:38:41 2009 24, 23 -- Received: from web110811.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (web110811.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [67.195.13.234]) 24, 23 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with SMTP id n0D9ceIv028716 24, 23 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 03:38:40 -0600 24, 23 -- Received: (qmail 51735 invoked by uid 60001); 13 Jan 2009 09:38:39 -0000 24, 23 -- DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; 24, 23 -- s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; 24, 23 -- h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; 24, 23 -- b=WZ/fstX2SL7fNwcND9HJOkb+HHnMQWPrIRGFtWIxC3ramQWnjPyaWoF1w0ycmEk/3l6dZqh3ozcBl9MFqDznUQbSVUIamugOS36Tkka07luWlPVRYShYPngi6gAwpvtnsXzzzgSWE4HeT2tmRL1v86xp3sC6nfcF17Pv7Fo8tgI=; 24, 23 -- X-YMail-OSG: o9XbG70VM1mt1OYnAXQRD6U2ubiXED.mno5vQWXKjf16cV.8ucVWjlSr4Z5_DRY7yb6F.tDBPyUc56zh0k9JddAjj8TS9eS2NeEaf9HOCcnSYA2B.HMxdx2tbQKgIdTdKXJdSHsYgz3duwt_WPOiOKuuU.69n1eUA6drW.RSeiccF2lXK_qbPcFGhOUXjVxbMk8ZS4BcF8P2eELKCdY58ID7WbgOGHKK 24, 23 -- Received: from [80.122.101.100] by web110811.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 01:38:39 PST 24, 23 -- X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/1156.77 YahooMailWebService/0.7.260.1 24, 23 -- References: {200901122019.n0CKJcVt015884-at-ns.microscopy.com} 24, 23 -- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 01:38:39 -0800 (PST) 24, 23 -- From: Stephane Nizet {nizets2-at-yahoo.com} 24, 23 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] RE: TEM:cell culture with extracellular calcium 24, 23 -- To: DusevichV-at-umkc.edu 24, 23 -- Cc: microscopy-at-microscopy.com 24, 23 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 24, 23 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 24, 23 -- Message-ID: {849685.51720.qm-at-web110811.mail.gq1.yahoo.com} 24, 23 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 24, 23 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n0D9ceIv028716 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
Uranium isotopes emit both alpha particles, beta-rays and gamma-rays, the former being the most significant in terms of biological hazard [assuming it's internalised]. However even natural uranium is weakly radioactive: fissile Uranium-235 has a half life of 704 million years, U-238 4.5 billion years, and 'nasty' U-234 has a modest one of 240,000 years. When uranium is enriched for bomb production or for use as reactor fuel, it's the fissile U-235* that’s wanted. However during enrichment U-234, being somewhat similar in atomic mass, gets in with the U-235 fraction, so the left over depleted uranium [DU, used in munitions casing and EM stains] is less radioactive than even natural uranium. Uranyl salts used for EM staining are now made from depleted uranium [which offers the lowest radioactivity], but compared to enriched uranium both are relatively low in radioactivity in any case, as natural uranium is 99.3% U-238 and only 0.0055% U-234.
Depleted Uranium is about 0.6 to 0.7 times as radioactive as natural uranium as it has even more U-238 and even less of the more radioactive isotopes [i.e. the small U-234 fraction accounts for about half the radioactivity of natural uranium]. U decay emits both alpha particles and beta+gamma rays. The gamma dose will be quite small [depending on the mass of the uranyl salts in your keep], but you should be able to detect it above background with a crackle-crackle type Geiger counter. As gamma dose is a function of mass & distance, keeping the small uranyl stock bottle well away from where you sit will probably suffice [perhaps with a ubiquitous 'do not eat' label, as internal exposure after ingestion/inhalation is it's main toxicological hazard]. The critical mass of U-233/U-235 [before a runaway nuclear fission reaction occurs and things get scary] is apparently around 15 to 52kg [10 to 17cm diameter volume] - never tried it personally, but that’s a lot of U and not something a microscopist need be concerned with.
In comparison plutonium-239 has a half-life of 24,000 years [ten times faster than U-234 and 187,500 faster than U238]. Thus 1g of Pu-239 is 187,500 more radioactive than 1g of U-238. There are long range gamma-rays emitted from uranium as well as alpha-particles [the latter are only of biological concern if the U is ingested]. Weapons grade enriched uranium has an alpha-particle activity of 1.91 Bq ug-1 whereas natural uranium is 100 times lower at 0.02 Bq ug-1 [and depleted uranium will be below even this]. The gamma-ray activity will be about 40% of this [for enriched uranium]. Out of interest, enriched uranium is around 93% U-235 and 0.8% U-234 [well it was in the stuff I used], thus it is significantly more radioactive compared to natural [and depleted] uranium.
However for all practical purposes the radiation effects of depleted [and even natural] uranium can generally be ignored when compared to background radiation. This is largely the case for uranium, as being a heavy metal analogue of lead, it is very toxic to life simply as a chemical. Like lead, mercury and arsenic, uranium serves 'no useful biological function' and all life-time studies find that kidney damage from uranium ingestion probably occurs long before any radiation mutagenic effects would be seen [you only die once, and as the natural U body burden increases the heavy metal toxicity is likely to get you first].
It is generally considered that lead is far more chemically cyto-toxic than uranium [largely due to U's far lower solubility and it's quick excretion rate - although this leads to deposition in the kidney tubules that can cause kidney damage]. Like lead, it is also excreted via the hair. Lead can severely affect the nervous system and other biological pathways, but this isn't seen with uranium [it's damage to kidneys being it's main toxic effect, although authors of recent DU studies have suggested links to birth defects and there's the long running controversy over gulf war syndrome]. It seems that humans have to ingest 10s of grams of natural uranium before adverse effects are seen in the short term. Animal studies suggest far lower limits are a wise precaution though with this toxic heavy metal, as damage has been seen in other organs [e.g. in the lung after inhalation of 'insoluble' enriched UO2 particles]. Natural uranium can deposit on the bone, but the weak alpha-radiation dose is far too low to induce things like leukaemia [in all probability]. So it is probably safer to be shot with a depleted uranium bullet than a lead bullet [but both are best avoided]. Likewise lead shielding is probably potentially more toxic than the uranyl salts it would be shielding. That's not to say uranium isn't very toxic, just that soluble lead is even more toxic [hence it's ability to destroy the Roman Empire from within].
Pelco [who supply the uranyl EM stain] state in there safety sheet that a material must have a specific activity greater than 74 Becquerel per gram (Bq/g) in order to be regarded as a radioactive material. One bequeral is one disintegration per gram [a very low rate]. Uranyl Acetate sold by Ted Pella, Inc. has an activity of 10,400 disintegrations sec-1 g. Thus uranyl acetate stain it is clearly also radioactive [at 0.20 - 0.51 µCi/g], although the biological hazard from far lower gamma/beta emission rate can often be considered negligible compared to background or the alpha particle emission should it become internalised in someone.
So I'd treat uranium with caution as a toxic heavy metal chemical rather than a radioactive one [as that’s probably its greatest hazard]. Either way it's hazard is by ingestion or inhalation, so handle with care as outlined on the supplied safety sheet. External irradiation by the gamma & beta rays if fairly insignificant from depleted uranium EM stains, and generally most recommend simply storing in a metal can. It's daughter decay product: Radon gas, can cause problems in enclosed areas where uranium is abundant in the soil though.
Regards
Keith J Morris
*U-235 is an interesting isotope and as well as being fissile it can be measured in extremely minute [trace] quantities using a technique known as delayed neutron analysis.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Keith J. Morris, Molecular Cytogenetics and Microscopy Core, Laboratory 00/069 and 00/070, The Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford OX3 7BN, United Kingdom.
-----Original Message----- X-from: abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com [mailto:abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com] Sent: 09 January 2009 00:27 To: kjmorris-at-well.ox.ac.uk
This Question/Comment was submitted to the Microscopy Listserver using the WWW based Form at http://microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/MLFormMail.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember this posting is most likely not from a Subscriber, so when replying please copy both abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com as well as the MIcroscopy Listserver ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com Name: Alex Besenyo PhD
Organization: ibilabs
Title-Subject: [Filtered] uranyl compounds are alpha emitters only
Question: Question:
Is it true that the stuff we use has been somehow depleted, so that it isn't as radioactive as "real" uranyl salts? Or is this yet another old wive's tale of EM?!
Reply:
When we manufacture these compounds we purchase the raw uranium in a depleted state from the government. There is no chance for error here. We do not use natural uranium.
This means that the enrichable uranium U-235 has been removed. The then U-238 which only emitts alpha radiation is procesed.
The term "depleted" means that U-235 has been removed.
If even by the slightest chance that U235 were present then every alarm would go off in our facility because Beta and Gamma radiation is detected.
I hope this answers everybodies concerns.
Our products are sold exclusively through a distributor network and all of them have been instructed on this information.
I only responded when I saw the original post and I had to respond before it got out of control.
Really, I have the feeling that we are making an elephant out of a mouse. How many times do you have to handle how much of depleted U? 2 times a year? 10 milligrams? How do you weight your uranium salt? Do you pour all the content of the box on the bench, then take what you need? :-) As someone said, I am more concerned about the chemical toxicity following ingestion (although even in this case it is probably fewer than few) than the radiations, except if you leave the box of U salt in one pocket of your blue jeans, which I wouldn't recommend (especially if you want children later).
Alternatively, I was infinitely more concerned about the election of Bush as a president than about the radiation of depleted U. Obviously I was right :-D And there is no Bush-Hazard-Security-Agency, no rules to dispose of Bush in an environment-friendly way and no ALARE rules (as long as reasonably eligible). Well it is never too late to start. Oh, is it? :-D
----- Original Message ---- X-from: "kjmorris-at-well.ox.ac.uk" {kjmorris-at-well.ox.ac.uk} To: nizets2-at-yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:12:29 AM
Hi all,
Uranium isotopes emit both alpha particles, beta-rays and gamma-rays, the former being the most significant in terms of biological hazard [assuming it's internalised]. However even natural uranium is weakly radioactive: fissile Uranium-235 has a half life of 704 million years, U-238 4.5 billion years, and 'nasty' U-234 has a modest one of 240,000 years. When uranium is enriched for bomb production or for use as reactor fuel, it's the fissile U-235* that’s wanted. However during enrichment U-234, being somewhat similar in atomic mass, gets in with the U-235 fraction, so the left over depleted uranium [DU, used in munitions casing and EM stains] is less radioactive than even natural uranium. Uranyl salts used for EM staining are now made from depleted uranium [which offers the lowest radioactivity], but compared to enriched uranium both are relatively low in radioactivity in any case, as natural uranium is 99.3% U-238 and only 0.0055% U-234.
Depleted Uranium is about 0.6 to 0.7 times as radioactive as natural uranium as it has even more U-238 and even less of the more radioactive isotopes [i.e. the small U-234 fraction accounts for about half the radioactivity of natural uranium]. U decay emits both alpha particles and beta+gamma rays. The gamma dose will be quite small [depending on the mass of the uranyl salts in your keep], but you should be able to detect it above background with a crackle-crackle type Geiger counter. As gamma dose is a function of mass & distance, keeping the small uranyl stock bottle well away from where you sit will probably suffice [perhaps with a ubiquitous 'do not eat' label, as internal exposure after ingestion/inhalation is it's main toxicological hazard]. The critical mass of U-233/U-235 [before a runaway nuclear fission reaction occurs and things get scary] is apparently around 15 to 52kg [10 to 17cm diameter volume] - never tried it personally, but that’s a lot of U and not something a microscopist need be concerned with.Â
In comparison plutonium-239 has a half-life of 24,000 years [ten times faster than U-234 and 187,500 faster than U238]. Thus 1g of Pu-239 is 187,500 more radioactive than 1g of U-238. There are long range gamma-rays emitted from uranium as well as alpha-particles [the latter are only of biological concern if the U is ingested]. Weapons grade enriched uranium has an alpha-particle activity of 1.91 Bq ug-1 whereas natural uranium is 100 times lower at 0.02 Bq ug-1 [and depleted uranium will be below even this]. The gamma-ray activity will be about 40% of this [for enriched uranium]. Out of interest, enriched uranium is around 93% U-235 and 0.8% U-234 [well it was in the stuff I used], thus it is significantly more radioactive compared to natural [and depleted] uranium.
However for all practical purposes the radiation effects of depleted [and even natural] uranium can generally be ignored when compared to background radiation. This is largely the case for uranium, as being a heavy metal analogue of lead, it is very toxic to life simply as a chemical. Like lead, mercury and arsenic, uranium serves 'no useful biological function' and all life-time studies find that kidney damage from uranium ingestion probably occurs long before any radiation mutagenic effects would be seen [you only die once, and as the natural U body burden increases the heavy metal toxicity is likely to get you first].
It is generally considered that lead is far more chemically cyto-toxic than uranium [largely due to U's far lower solubility and it's quick excretion rate - although this leads to deposition in the kidney tubules that can cause kidney damage]. Like lead, it is also excreted via the hair. Lead can severely affect the nervous system and other biological pathways, but this isn't seen with uranium [it's damage to kidneys being it's main toxic effect, although authors of recent DU studies have suggested links to birth defects and there's the long running controversy over gulf war syndrome]. It seems that humans have to ingest 10s of grams of natural uranium before adverse effects are seen in the short term. Animal studies suggest far lower limits are a wise precaution though with this toxic heavy metal, as damage has been seen in other organs [e.g. in the lung after inhalation of 'insoluble' enriched UO2 particles]. Natural uranium can deposit on the bone, but the weak alpha-radiation dose is far too low to induce things like leukaemia [in all probability]. So it is probably safer to be shot with a depleted uranium bullet than a lead bullet [but both are best avoided]. Likewise lead shielding is probably potentially more toxic than the uranyl salts it would be shielding. That's not to say uranium isn't very toxic, just that soluble lead is even more toxic [hence it's ability to destroy the Roman Empire from within].
Pelco [who supply the uranyl EM stain] state in there safety sheet that a material must have a specific activity greater than 74 Becquerel per gram (Bq/g) in order to be regarded as a radioactive material. One bequeral is one disintegration per gram [a very low rate]. Uranyl Acetate sold by Ted Pella, Inc. has an activity of 10,400 disintegrations sec-1 g. Thus uranyl acetate stain it is clearly also radioactive [at 0.20 - 0.51 µCi/g], although the biological hazard from far lower gamma/beta emission rate can often be considered negligible compared to background or the alpha particle emission should it become internalised in someone.
So I'd treat uranium with caution as a toxic heavy metal chemical rather than a radioactive one [as that’s probably its greatest hazard]. Either way it's hazard is by ingestion or inhalation, so handle with care as outlined on the supplied safety sheet. External irradiation by the gamma & beta rays if fairly insignificant from depleted uranium EM stains, and generally most recommend simply storing in a metal can. It's daughter decay product: Radon gas, can cause problems in enclosed areas where uranium is abundant in the soil though.
Regards
Keith J Morris
*U-235 is an interesting isotope and as well as being fissile it can be measured in extremely minute [trace] quantities using a technique known as delayed neutron analysis.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Keith J. Morris, Molecular Cytogenetics and Microscopy Core, Laboratory 00/069 and 00/070, The Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford OX3 7BN, United Kingdom.
-----Original Message----- X-from: abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com [mailto:abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com] Sent: 09 January 2009 00:27 To: kjmorris-at-well.ox.ac.uk
This Question/Comment was submitted to the Microscopy Listserver using the WWW based Form at http://microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/MLFormMail.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember this posting is most likely not from a Subscriber, so when replying please copy both abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com as well as the MIcroscopy Listserver ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com Name: Alex Besenyo PhD
Organization: ibilabs
Title-Subject: [Filtered] uranyl compounds are alpha emitters only
Question: Question:
Is it true that the stuff we use has been somehow depleted, so that it isn't as radioactive as "real" uranyl salts? Or is this yet another old wive's tale of EM?!
Reply:
When we manufacture these compounds we purchase the raw uranium in a depleted state from the government. There is no chance for error here. We do not use natural uranium.
This means that the enrichable uranium U-235 has been removed. The then U-238 which only emitts alpha radiation is procesed.
The term "depleted" means that U-235 has been removed.
If even by the slightest chance that U235 were present then every alarm would go off in our facility because Beta and Gamma radiation is detected.
I hope this answers everybodies concerns.
Our products are sold exclusively through a distributor network and all of them have been instructed on this information.
I only responded when I saw the original post and I had to respond before it got out of control.
Sincerely Alex Besenyo PhD
 Login Host: 74.173.69.139 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
==============================Original Headers============================== 17, 11 -- From zaluzec-at-microscopy.com Thu Jan 8 18:19:52 2009 17, 11 -- Received: from [206.69.208.22] (msdvpn8.msd.anl.gov [130.202.238.72]) 17, 11 --    by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n090Jp6S032218 17, 11 --    for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Thu, 8 Jan 2009 18:19:52 -0600 17, 11 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 17, 11 -- Message-Id: {p06240809c58c4893ab36-at-[206.69.208.22]} 17, 11 -- Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 18:19:48 -0600 17, 11 -- To: microscopy-at-microscopy.com 17, 11 -- From: abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com (by way of MicroscopyListserver) 17, 11 -- Subject: viaWWW: uranyl compounds are alpha emitters only 17, 11 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" ==============================End of - Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 39, 23 -- From kjmorris-at-well.ox.ac.uk Tue Jan 13 04:05:07 2009 39, 23 -- Received: from morse.well.ox.ac.uk (morse.well.ox.ac.uk [129.67.44.2]) 39, 23 --    by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0DA56tP012959 39, 23 --    for {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} ; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 04:05:06 -0600 39, 23 -- Received: from dhcp079.well.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.44.178] helo=CytoWhizz) 39, 23 --    by morse.well.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.52) 39, 23 --    id 1LMg8v-0006zz-ST 39, 23 --    for Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:05:06 +0000 39, 23 -- From: "Keith Morris" {kjmorris-at-well.ox.ac.uk} 39, 23 -- To: {Microscopy-at-Microscopy.Com} 39, 23 -- References: {200901090027.n090RFFt021207-at-ns.microscopy.com} 39, 23 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] viaWWW:Yes uranyl compounds do emit few gammas, betas as well 39, 23 -- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:05:06 -0000 39, 23 -- Message-ID: {08E534FB0C6245979400D75365C7BAAF-at-CytoWhizz} 39, 23 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 39, 23 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 39, 23 --    charset="iso-8859-1" 39, 23 -- X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 39, 23 -- Thread-Index: Aclx8QYXX4MpJfSGTamN32m5ifY3bwAVUa0g 39, 23 -- In-Reply-To: {200901090027.n090RFFt021207-at-ns.microscopy.com} 39, 23 -- X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512 39, 23 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 39, 23 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n0DA56tP012959 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 57, 22 -- From nizets2-at-yahoo.com Tue Jan 13 07:11:23 2009 57, 22 -- Received: from web110816.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (web110816.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [67.195.13.239]) 57, 22 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with SMTP id n0DDBMqm009455 57, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 07:11:22 -0600 57, 22 -- Received: (qmail 20923 invoked by uid 60001); 13 Jan 2009 13:11:22 -0000 57, 22 -- DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; 57, 22 -- s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; 57, 22 -- h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; 57, 22 -- b=AkrMz6GOq46CXKK5pOahDO6ZAfPPx48th9zUS4KULg0103NI1ifS/Zu4WQcIq9wOWLKYF3OO1YZ0dt85zbmE8FcB9bLkv6pP9Hlqm4LU3TxczJUrh6vJ831tTsMFJTsVcPu3d3VnEVudGcCV46iJvZ4S2VZXnhaGLhsxvsG0Tb0=; 57, 22 -- X-YMail-OSG: Zk.PogUVM1kVvQOYpqeXXnlFegUuBHQSs4XK0E87Nd8rz9zPBGBDGggYS18nRO3I5qe6z1y4aJX8L.3g7JMsH0hfefy8cMoX5gdFUcEdg_IpPdXzZl8e9M0hRcD65TsRPyAVZGRvqSOU_m7no6fnPXvwOLR1U7o578vTTjlpHMGglKoYzYIdJ7UAMwm7jQChIxQJCS8dDKLBbKv4ru.Vo4qr7pLEJ.jK 57, 22 -- Received: from [80.122.101.100] by web110816.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 05:11:22 PST 57, 22 -- X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/1156.77 YahooMailWebService/0.7.260.1 57, 22 -- References: {200901131012.n0DACTSC020042-at-ns.microscopy.com} 57, 22 -- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 05:11:22 -0800 (PST) 57, 22 -- From: Stephane Nizet {nizets2-at-yahoo.com} 57, 22 -- Subject: uranyl compounds do emit few gammas, betas as well - Who cares? 57, 22 -- To: microscopy-at-microscopy.com 57, 22 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 57, 22 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 57, 22 -- Message-ID: {380151.20813.qm-at-web110816.mail.gq1.yahoo.com} 57, 22 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 57, 22 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n0DDBMqm009455 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
Folks: Old photo/darkroom supplies, etc., may find a happy home in art schools. I have a young artist friend who is taking a photography class and the instructor is insisting that she start with film in order to understand the fundamentals of photography - particularly for B/W. Without getting into arguments about log/linear behavior, benefits of one over the other, etc., the point is that these folks may be able to utilize film supplies and are likely to be very appreciative of a cheap/free source. They may not have much use for the Type xxx film, but some of the other supplies could be valuable. Best Regards, Bill William A. Heeschen Microscopy, Digital Imaging 1897 Bldg, E-84 Dow Chemical Midland, MI 48667 mailto:waheeschen-at-dow.com
-----Original Message----- X-from: jkrupp-at-deltacollege.edu [mailto:jkrupp-at-deltacollege.edu] Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 5:04 PM To: Heeschen, Bill (WA)
Greetings
This is a message I never thought I would be sending.
We are getting out of the film and paper photo business, and have a lot of 'stuff' to give away or send to the landfill. Anyone with questions about whether digital imaging for EM is for real, let this be your wake-up call.
Most of what we have is old, probably not worth the cost to ship, unless you are desperate, or curious.
We have a bunch of old Polaroid stuff - 52, 53, 55, 331, 72, 554, 572. I don't even know what some of this was used for, if it rings your bell, let me know and I can tell you more.
We have lots of old photo paper. Polycontrast, Velox, etc. 8 x10 and 4 x5 sizes.
A little 4463 and a ton of SO-163. The SO-163 is old.
Bunch of misc. 35 mm rolls, B&W and color. Some 120 Tech Pan.
Most of this junk has been in a freezer. Some is pretty old and past its expiration date, but if you are interested, let me know and we can try to work something out. If I don't hear anything in the next week or so, its outa here.
Jon
Jonathan Krupp Delta College 5151Pacific Ave. Stockton, CA 95207 209-954-5284 jkrupp-at-deltacollege.edu
==============================Original Headers============================== 14, 42 -- From jkrupp-at-deltacollege.edu Mon Jan 12 15:59:23 2009 14, 42 -- Received: from mailin.deltacollege.edu (mailin.deltacollege.edu [207.62.178.150]) 14, 42 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with SMTP id n0CLxMKe006917 14, 42 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 15:59:23 -0600 14, 42 -- Received: from mailin.deltacollege.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) 14, 42 -- by localhost (Email Security Appliance) with SMTP id 7D4C918E05E 14, 42 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 21:34:33 +0000 (GMT) 14, 42 -- Received: from sjdccd.cc.ca.us (smtp.sjdccd.cc.ca.us [207.62.178.236]) 14, 42 -- by mailin.deltacollege.edu (Email Security Appliance) with ESMTP id 726D520CAFD 14, 42 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 21:34:33 +0000 (GMT) 14, 42 -- Received: from [207.62.178.20] (HELO sunspot.sjdccd.cc.ca.us) 14, 42 -- by sjdccd.cc.ca.us (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.9) 14, 42 -- with ESMTP id 44930245 for Microscopy-at-microscopy.com; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:59:19 -0800 14, 42 -- Received: from zmail.deltacollege.edu ([207.62.178.179]) by 14, 42 -- sunspot.sjdccd.cc.ca.us (Netscape Messaging Server 4.15) with 14, 42 -- ESMTP id KDDOD300.CM0 for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 14, 42 -- Jan 2009 13:43:51 -0800 14, 42 -- Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) 14, 42 -- by zmail.deltacollege.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13E398F74D38 14, 42 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:59:19 -0800 (PST) 14, 42 -- X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at 14, 42 -- X-Spam-Flag: NO 14, 42 -- X-Spam-Score: -2.324 14, 42 -- X-Spam-Level: 14, 42 -- X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.324 tagged_above=-10 required=6 tests=[AWL=0.175, 14, 42 -- BAYES_00=-2.599, RDNS_NONE=0.1] 14, 42 -- Received: from zmail.deltacollege.edu ([127.0.0.1]) 14, 42 -- by localhost (zmail.deltacollege.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) 14, 42 -- with ESMTP id sAJT+MZ3mFOx for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; 14, 42 -- Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:59:18 -0800 (PST) 14, 42 -- Received: from [172.20.4.106] (unknown [172.20.4.106]) 14, 42 -- by zmail.deltacollege.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id AEBE88F74D32 14, 42 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:59:18 -0800 (PST) 14, 42 -- Message-Id: {7C9F6B4C-B8AF-43D7-86A6-495112B71078-at-deltacollege.edu} 14, 42 -- From: Jon Krupp {jkrupp-at-deltacollege.edu} 14, 42 -- To: Microscopy-at-microscopy.com 14, 42 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes 14, 42 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 14, 42 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v930.3) 14, 42 -- Subject: Old film etc 14, 42 -- Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 13:59:18 -0800 14, 42 -- X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.930.3) ==============================End of - Headers==============================
==============================Original Headers============================== 21, 34 -- From WAHeeschen-at-dow.com Tue Jan 13 08:36:46 2009 21, 34 -- Received: from mail85.messagelabs.com (mail85.messagelabs.com [216.82.241.211]) 21, 34 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0DEaks3030832 21, 34 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 08:36:46 -0600 21, 34 -- X-VirusChecked: Checked 21, 34 -- X-Env-Sender: WAHeeschen-at-dow.com 21, 34 -- X-Msg-Ref: server-3.tower-85.messagelabs.com!1231857396!33256808!9 21, 34 -- X-StarScan-Version: 6.0.0; banners=-,-,- 21, 34 -- X-Originating-IP: [216.99.65.22] 21, 34 -- Received: (qmail 24830 invoked from network); 13 Jan 2009 14:36:45 -0000 21, 34 -- Received: from mail1.dow.com (HELO USMDLMDOWS001.dow.com) (216.99.65.22) 21, 34 -- by server-3.tower-85.messagelabs.com with RC4-SHA encrypted SMTP; 13 Jan 2009 14:36:45 -0000 21, 34 -- Received: from USMDLMDOWX026.dow.com ([163.198.215.57]) by USMDLMDOWS001.dow.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); 21, 34 -- Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:36:37 -0500 21, 34 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message 21, 34 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 21, 34 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 21, 34 -- charset="US-ASCII" 21, 34 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 21, 34 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] Old film etc 21, 34 -- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:36:37 -0500 21, 34 -- Message-ID: {9FAC91DDE67EF3448238E5E33D3E5AEF01C6B129-at-USMDLMDOWX026.dow.com} 21, 34 -- In-Reply-To: {200901122204.n0CM47gR016422-at-ns.microscopy.com} 21, 34 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: 21, 34 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 21, 34 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] Old film etc 21, 34 -- Thread-Index: Acl1AcbMkH3Log7TSe6nWCmmqyEhZgAiFHUg 21, 34 -- References: {200901122204.n0CM47gR016422-at-ns.microscopy.com} 21, 34 -- From: "Heeschen, Bill (WA)" {WAHeeschen-at-dow.com} 21, 34 -- To: {jkrupp-at-deltacollege.edu} 21, 34 -- Cc: {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 21, 34 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Jan 2009 14:36:37.0775 (UTC) FILETIME=[5753C9F0:01C9758C] 21, 34 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 21, 34 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n0DEaks3030832 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
Good point, although not necessarily the case. The Art and journalism deparments here have gone completely digital. Even strictly art photography, the kind that uses high silver content paper and so forth. They didn't even want a Durst enlarger. Anybody on the list looking for a Durst Laborator enlarger in excellent condition? With printing easel, extra lenses, etc.?
Phil
} } Folks: } Old photo/darkroom supplies, etc., may find a happy home in art schools. } I have a young artist friend who is taking a photography class and the } instructor is insisting that she start with film in order to understand } the fundamentals of photography - particularly for B/W. Without getting } into arguments about log/linear behavior, benefits of one over the } other, etc., the point is that these folks may be able to utilize film } supplies and are likely to be very appreciative of a cheap/free source. } They may not have much use for the Type xxx film, but some of the other } supplies could be valuable. } Best Regards, } Bill } William A. Heeschen } Microscopy, Digital Imaging } 1897 Bldg, E-84 } Dow Chemical } Midland, MI 48667 } mailto:waheeschen-at-dow.com } } -----Original Message----- } X-from: jkrupp-at-deltacollege.edu [mailto:jkrupp-at-deltacollege.edu] } Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 5:04 PM } To: Heeschen, Bill (WA) } Subject: [Microscopy] Old film etc } --- } } Greetings } } This is a message I never thought I would be sending. } } We are getting out of the film and paper photo business, and have a } lot of 'stuff' to give away or send to the landfill. Anyone with } questions about whether digital imaging for EM is for real, let this } be your wake-up call. } } Most of what we have is old, probably not worth the cost to ship, } unless you are desperate, or curious. } } We have a bunch of old Polaroid stuff - 52, 53, 55, 331, 72, 554, 572. } I don't even know what some of this was used for, if it rings your } bell, let me know and I can tell you more. } } We have lots of old photo paper. Polycontrast, Velox, etc. 8 x10 and 4 } x5 sizes. } } A little 4463 and a ton of SO-163. The SO-163 is old. } } Bunch of misc. 35 mm rolls, B&W and color. Some 120 Tech Pan. } } Most of this junk has been in a freezer. Some is pretty old and past } its expiration date, but if you are interested, let me know and we can } try to work something out. If I don't hear anything in the next week } or so, its outa here. } } Jon } } Jonathan Krupp } Delta College } 5151Pacific Ave. } Stockton, CA 95207 } 209-954-5284 } jkrupp-at-deltacollege.edu
-- Philip Oshel Microscopy Facility Supervisor Biology Department 024C Brooks Hall Central Michigan University Mt. Pleasant, MI 48859 (989) 774-3576
==============================Original Headers============================== 4, 25 -- From oshel1pe-at-cmich.edu Tue Jan 13 08:59:55 2009 4, 25 -- Received: from ob4.cmich.edu (ob4.cmich.edu [141.209.20.25]) 4, 25 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0DExs4e026270 4, 25 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 08:59:55 -0600 4, 25 -- Received: from egatea.central.cmich.local ([141.209.15.74]) 4, 25 -- by ob4.cmich.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id n0DExhQX000442 4, 25 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:59:53 -0500 4, 25 -- Received: from [141.209.160.249] ([141.209.160.249]) by egatea.central.cmich.local with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); 4, 25 -- Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:58:51 -0500 4, 25 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 4, 25 -- Message-Id: {f06240805c5925b610675-at-[141.209.160.249]} 4, 25 -- In-Reply-To: {200901131442.n0DEgQst004798-at-ns.microscopy.com} 4, 25 -- References: {200901131442.n0DEgQst004798-at-ns.microscopy.com} 4, 25 -- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:58:49 -0500 4, 25 -- To: Microscopy-at-microscopy.com 4, 25 -- From: Philip Oshel {oshel1pe-at-cmich.edu} 4, 25 -- Subject: [Microscopy] RE: Old film etc 4, 25 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" 4, 25 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Jan 2009 14:58:51.0969 (UTC) FILETIME=[7291A310:01C9758F] 4, 25 -- X-Canit-CHI2: 0.00 4, 25 -- X-Bayes-Prob: 0.0001 (Score -0.5, tokens from: -at--at-RPTN, default) 4, 25 -- X-Spam-Score: -4.40 () [Hold at 5.00] L_EXCH_MF,RDNS_NONE,Bayes(0.0001,-0.5) 4, 25 -- X-CanItPRO-Stream: default 4, 25 -- X-Canit-Stats-ID: 7380497 - 047461f10392 4, 25 -- X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . roaringpenguin . com) on 141.209.20.25 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
No, it does not. Can you read other, more meaningful postings?
Vladimir
that we have a material which emits alpha, beta } and gamma rays. I think the original labeling for uranyl } compounds which said "alpha emitter" should be changed. } Especially, for the reason that there might be microscopists } who are using uranyl compounds in their labs but, do not } follow the Microscopy List. } } Is there anybody in this group who is in a position and } willing to contact Nuclear Regulatory Commission on this subject? } } Regards, } Ayten. } } } -- } =========================== } Ayten Celik-Aktas, PhD } Ankara University } Electron Microscopy Laboratory } Ankara, Turkey } =========================== } } } On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 8:26 PM, {tivol-at-caltech.edu} wrote: } } } } } } } } } -------------------------------------------------------------- } -------------- } } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The Microscopy } Society of America } } To Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } } On-Line Help http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } } } -------------------------------------------------------------- } -------------- } } } } } } On Jan 9, 2009, at 4:07 PM, beaurega-at-westol.com wrote: } } } } } Someone strongly pointed out that U is an alpha emitter, } not a gamma } } } emitter, and I was not reading gamma radiation (but I was). You } } } pointed } } } out that it was the decay impurities that were the gamma emitters } } } and that } } } was what I was reading on my counter. I agree that U-238 } and DU are } } } still } } } radioactive. } } } } } Here's my favorite. "depleted uranium is 40% less radioactive than } } } natural } } } uranium." That means 60% of the radioactivity is still } there. I am } } } not } } } sure that includes gamma but probably. } } } } } } Dear Paul, } } Since the activities of the U isotopes are inversely } proportional to } } their half-lives, and since the half lives of U235 and U234 } are about } } 7 and 20,000 times shorter respectively than U238's, the amount of } } radiation from U234 is about equal to that from U238, and that from } } U235 is about 5% of that from the others, so your quote that DU has } } only 60% the activity of natural U checks out. I pointed out that } } ~1/4 of the U238 decays are to an excited state of Th234, } which is ~50 } } keV above the ground state, so pure U238 will produce some } low-energy } } gammas, as will many of the daughters. The bottom line is } that direct } } measurements performed correctly don't lie, so they are the best way } } to settle this issue once and for all. } } Yours, } } Bill Tivol, PhD } } EM Scientist } } Ultrafast EM Facility } } Noyes Laboratory, MC 127-72 } } California Institute of Technology } } Pasadena CA 91125 } } (626) 395-8833 } } tivol-at-caltech.edu } } } } } } ==============================Original } Headers============================== } 8, 32 -- From celikaktas-at-gmail.com Tue Jan 13 01:21:11 2009 } 8, 32 -- Received: from mu-out-0910.google.com } (mu-out-0910.google.com [209.85.134.189]) } 8, 32 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) } with ESMTP id n0D7LAJI000663 } 8, 32 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Tue, 13 Jan } 2009 01:21:10 -0600 } 8, 32 -- Received: by mu-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id } w9so6630873mue.0 } 8, 32 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Mon, 12 Jan } 2009 23:21:09 -0800 (PST) } 8, 32 -- DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; } 8, 32 -- d=gmail.com; s=gamma; } 8, 32 -- } h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:date:message-id:subject } 8, 32 -- :from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; } 8, 32 -- bh=wjfEMkzAxlZHP279oRoyEi2BHmNZ5qmvW9E+/LODEuc=; } 8, 32 -- } b=E1VS580eiZKvpEWh5Swi392D4XXRNLvDCVuFEuSp9UqhBV1JvfuOvMIDnVoR1vNznc } 8, 32 -- } r5L1Z0TtXqt7mJXYCYcuaRGapCY8uHGnXv6W+VlNuOkBmNIfp97CLppTrQ9q9ppekELu } 8, 32 -- kwwJ7gZg97W5DDFnjeF/OxGaHUrQ6UD82ohLY= } 8, 32 -- DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; } 8, 32 -- d=gmail.com; s=gamma; } 8, 32 -- } h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type } 8, 32 -- :content-transfer-encoding; } 8, 32 -- } b=ntMPorKNV/TSgRwuNzbJnEnwEgRXpiOCZr8l7jnSDPeacm7aCKVfux+bNhJKw49bri } 8, 32 -- } JcAVl8XZn7UmecRQPwL7o5bltCdYS+8v59joM0sIvDoKUmY8PGV2YorAmmiQ6/M6j/ll } 8, 32 -- JGVoOwQH4/WN2HEF0ny5gehH0tcdQgk08a7+Q= } 8, 32 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 } 8, 32 -- Received: by 10.103.217.7 with SMTP id } u7mr3452314muq.125.1231831269725; Mon, } 8, 32 -- 12 Jan 2009 23:21:09 -0800 (PST) } 8, 32 -- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:21:09 +0300 } 8, 32 -- Message-ID: } {1075c5c10901122321l5c772174r4fedda4b0656a5-at-mail.gmail.com} } 8, 32 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] Updating Label?... viaWWW: } uranyl compounds are } 8, 32 -- alpha emitters } 8, 32 -- From: Ayten Celik-Aktas {celikaktas-at-gmail.com} } 8, 32 -- To: microscopy {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} } 8, 32 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 } 8, 32 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit } ==============================End of - } Headers============================== } }
==============================Original Headers============================== 7, 25 -- From DusevichV-at-umkc.edu Tue Jan 13 09:12:59 2009 7, 25 -- Received: from KC-MSXPROTO2.kc.umkc.edu (smtp.exchange.umkc.edu [134.193.143.155]) 7, 25 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0DFCxeO009341 7, 25 -- for {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:12:59 -0600 7, 25 -- Received: from KC-MSX1.kc.umkc.edu ([134.193.32.11]) by KC-MSXPROTO2.kc.umkc.edu with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); 7, 25 -- Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:12:59 -0600 7, 25 -- X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 7, 25 -- Content-class: urn:content-classes:message 7, 25 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 7, 25 -- Content-Type: text/plain; 7, 25 -- charset="us-ascii" 7, 25 -- Subject: RE: [Microscopy] Re: Updating Label?... viaWWW: uranyl compounds are 7, 25 -- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 09:12:59 -0600 7, 25 -- Message-ID: {032EC4F75A527A4FA58C5B1B5DECFBB3062CB7AF-at-KC-MSX1.kc.umkc.edu} 7, 25 -- In-Reply-To: {200901130722.n0D7M7G5001697-at-ns.microscopy.com} 7, 25 -- X-MS-Has-Attach: 7, 25 -- X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 7, 25 -- Thread-Topic: [Microscopy] Re: Updating Label?... viaWWW: uranyl compounds are 7, 25 -- thread-index: Acl1T6VuVvBucRIWSfWbcChvYMJnGgAQY0fQ 7, 25 -- References: {200901130722.n0D7M7G5001697-at-ns.microscopy.com} 7, 25 -- From: "Dusevich, Vladimir" {DusevichV-at-umkc.edu} 7, 25 -- To: {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} 7, 25 -- X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Jan 2009 15:12:59.0426 (UTC) FILETIME=[6BB15020:01C97591] 7, 25 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 7, 25 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n0DFCxeO009341 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
From mathewokon-at-sify.com Tue Jan 13 10:44:28 2009 Return-Path: {mathewokon-at-sify.com} Received: from vetbrands.com.br (smtp-gw.vetbrands.com.br [201.63.46.162]) by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0DGiRNe028666; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:44:28 -0600 BrmaOutput: [41.222.67.140] Received: from User ([41.222.67.140]) (authenticated bits=0) by vetbrands.com.br (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id n0DC3hlv024740; Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:03:47 -0200 Message-Id: {200901131203.n0DC3hlv024740-at-vetbrands.com.br} Reply-To: {mathew_okon1-at-yahoo.es}
Indeed, from Pelco's measurements of their solution I estimate that if you held a 25g bottle of their uranyl acetate against your skin for an entire year you would receive about 3.5 times the annual dose* you would get from background radiation sources [over the same year] - about 1,300 mRem. This would largely be from the gamma radiation [as you can assume the beta-rays and alpha particles are blocked by the glass jar, i.e. you kept the lid on, and your skin surface].
Keith
*Annual dose assumed to be 360 mRem [18% man made + 82% natural]. A radiation worker is allowed 5,000 mRem maximum occupational exposure.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Keith J. Morris, Molecular Cytogenetics and Microscopy Core, Laboratory 00/069 and 00/070, The Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford OX3 7BN, United Kingdom.
-----Original Message----- X-from: nizets2-at-yahoo.com [mailto:nizets2-at-yahoo.com] Sent: 13 January 2009 13:19 To: kjmorris-at-well.ox.ac.uk
Dear all!
Really, I have the feeling that we are making an elephant out of a mouse. How many times do you have to handle how much of depleted U? 2 times a year? 10 milligrams? How do you weight your uranium salt? Do you pour all the content of the box on the bench, then take what you need? :-) As someone said, I am more concerned about the chemical toxicity following ingestion (although even in this case it is probably fewer than few) than the radiations, except if you leave the box of U salt in one pocket of your blue jeans, which I wouldn't recommend (especially if you want children later).
Alternatively, I was infinitely more concerned about the election of Bush as a president than about the radiation of depleted U. Obviously I was right :-D And there is no Bush-Hazard-Security-Agency, no rules to dispose of Bush in an environment-friendly way and no ALARE rules (as long as reasonably eligible). Well it is never too late to start. Oh, is it? :-D
----- Original Message ---- X-from: "kjmorris-at-well.ox.ac.uk" {kjmorris-at-well.ox.ac.uk} To: nizets2-at-yahoo.com Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2009 11:12:29 AM
Hi all,
Uranium isotopes emit both alpha particles, beta-rays and gamma-rays, the former being the most significant in terms of biological hazard [assuming it's internalised]. However even natural uranium is weakly radioactive: fissile Uranium-235 has a half life of 704 million years, U-238 4.5 billion years, and 'nasty' U-234 has a modest one of 240,000 years. When uranium is enriched for bomb production or for use as reactor fuel, it's the fissile U-235* that’s wanted. However during enrichment U-234, being somewhat similar in atomic mass, gets in with the U-235 fraction, so the left over depleted uranium [DU, used in munitions casing and EM stains] is less radioactive than even natural uranium. Uranyl salts used for EM staining are now made from depleted uranium [which offers the lowest radioactivity], but compared to enriched uranium both are relatively low in radioactivity in any case, as natural uranium is 99.3% U-238 and only 0.0055% U-234.
Depleted Uranium is about 0.6 to 0.7 times as radioactive as natural uranium as it has even more U-238 and even less of the more radioactive isotopes [i.e. the small U-234 fraction accounts for about half the radioactivity of natural uranium]. U decay emits both alpha particles and beta+gamma rays. The gamma dose will be quite small [depending on the mass of the uranyl salts in your keep], but you should be able to detect it above background with a crackle-crackle type Geiger counter. As gamma dose is a function of mass & distance, keeping the small uranyl stock bottle well away from where you sit will probably suffice [perhaps with a ubiquitous 'do not eat' label, as internal exposure after ingestion/inhalation is it's main toxicological hazard]. The critical mass of U-233/U-235 [before a runaway nuclear fission reaction occurs and things get scary] is apparently around 15 to 52kg [10 to 17cm diameter volume] - never tried it personally, but that’s a lot of U and not something a microscopist need be concerned with.Â
In comparison plutonium-239 has a half-life of 24,000 years [ten times faster than U-234 and 187,500 faster than U238]. Thus 1g of Pu-239 is 187,500 more radioactive than 1g of U-238. There are long range gamma-rays emitted from uranium as well as alpha-particles [the latter are only of biological concern if the U is ingested]. Weapons grade enriched uranium has an alpha-particle activity of 1.91 Bq ug-1 whereas natural uranium is 100 times lower at 0.02 Bq ug-1 [and depleted uranium will be below even this]. The gamma-ray activity will be about 40% of this [for enriched uranium]. Out of interest, enriched uranium is around 93% U-235 and 0.8% U-234 [well it was in the stuff I used], thus it is significantly more radioactive compared to natural [and depleted] uranium.
However for all practical purposes the radiation effects of depleted [and even natural] uranium can generally be ignored when compared to background radiation. This is largely the case for uranium, as being a heavy metal analogue of lead, it is very toxic to life simply as a chemical. Like lead, mercury and arsenic, uranium serves 'no useful biological function' and all life-time studies find that kidney damage from uranium ingestion probably occurs long before any radiation mutagenic effects would be seen [you only die once, and as the natural U body burden increases the heavy metal toxicity is likely to get you first].
It is generally considered that lead is far more chemically cyto-toxic than uranium [largely due to U's far lower solubility and it's quick excretion rate - although this leads to deposition in the kidney tubules that can cause kidney damage]. Like lead, it is also excreted via the hair. Lead can severely affect the nervous system and other biological pathways, but this isn't seen with uranium [it's damage to kidneys being it's main toxic effect, although authors of recent DU studies have suggested links to birth defects and there's the long running controversy over gulf war syndrome]. It seems that humans have to ingest 10s of grams of natural uranium before adverse effects are seen in the short term. Animal studies suggest far lower limits are a wise precaution though with this toxic heavy metal, as damage has been seen in other organs [e.g. in the lung after inhalation of 'insoluble' enriched UO2 particles]. Natural uranium can deposit on the bone, but the weak alpha-radiation dose is far too low to induce things like leukaemia [in all probability]. So it is probably safer to be shot with a depleted uranium bullet than a lead bullet [but both are best avoided]. Likewise lead shielding is probably potentially more toxic than the uranyl salts it would be shielding. That's not to say uranium isn't very toxic, just that soluble lead is even more toxic [hence it's ability to destroy the Roman Empire from within].
Pelco [who supply the uranyl EM stain] state in there safety sheet that a material must have a specific activity greater than 74 Becquerel per gram (Bq/g) in order to be regarded as a radioactive material. One bequeral is one disintegration per gram [a very low rate]. Uranyl Acetate sold by Ted Pella, Inc. has an activity of 10,400 disintegrations sec-1 g. Thus uranyl acetate stain it is clearly also radioactive [at 0.20 - 0.51 µCi/g], although the biological hazard from far lower gamma/beta emission rate can often be considered negligible compared to background or the alpha particle emission should it become internalised in someone.
So I'd treat uranium with caution as a toxic heavy metal chemical rather than a radioactive one [as that’s probably its greatest hazard]. Either way it's hazard is by ingestion or inhalation, so handle with care as outlined on the supplied safety sheet. External irradiation by the gamma & beta rays if fairly insignificant from depleted uranium EM stains, and generally most recommend simply storing in a metal can. It's daughter decay product: Radon gas, can cause problems in enclosed areas where uranium is abundant in the soil though.
Regards
Keith J Morris
*U-235 is an interesting isotope and as well as being fissile it can be measured in extremely minute [trace] quantities using a technique known as delayed neutron analysis.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dr Keith J. Morris, Molecular Cytogenetics and Microscopy Core, Laboratory 00/069 and 00/070, The Wellcome Trust Centre for Human Genetics, Roosevelt Drive, Oxford OX3 7BN, United Kingdom.
-----Original Message----- X-from: abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com [mailto:abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com] Sent: 09 January 2009 00:27 To: kjmorris-at-well.ox.ac.uk
This Question/Comment was submitted to the Microscopy Listserver using the WWW based Form at http://microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/MLFormMail.html --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remember this posting is most likely not from a Subscriber, so when replying please copy both abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com as well as the MIcroscopy Listserver ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Email: abesenyo-at-ibilabs.com Name: Alex Besenyo PhD
Organization: ibilabs
Title-Subject: [Filtered] uranyl compounds are alpha emitters only
Question: Question:
Is it true that the stuff we use has been somehow depleted, so that it isn't as radioactive as "real" uranyl salts? Or is this yet another old wive's tale of EM?!
Reply:
When we manufacture these compounds we purchase the raw uranium in a depleted state from the government. There is no chance for error here. We do not use natural uranium.
This means that the enrichable uranium U-235 has been removed. The then U-238 which only emitts alpha radiation is procesed.
The term "depleted" means that U-235 has been removed.
If even by the slightest chance that U235 were present then every alarm would go off in our facility because Beta and Gamma radiation is detected.
I hope this answers everybodies concerns.
Our products are sold exclusively through a distributor network and all of them have been instructed on this information.
I only responded when I saw the original post and I had to respond before it got out of control.
They tried examination by SEM but needed better resolution than we could achieve with our conventional, older SEMs. I considered using HF to digest the sand grain but they nixed the idea since they wanted to show orientation of tubules relative to the surface. Oh, well.
We did get sections using a diamond knife but the nanotubes appeared to be round globes rather than tubes. I'm uncertain if the embedding somehow messed them up or, more probably, nanotubes had not formed and we were looking at sphreoidal materials instead.
John
} Hi John! Sorry for the very late reply but I was } in well-earned holidays (and yes this year they } were long). I often cut hard particles under 1 } µm in size with little problem to the knife. It } is true though that the particles move in the } resin, leaving holes. I suppose that from a } given size the damage to the knife becomes a } real problem. Your particles are probably much } bigger, which may be a big deal to cut. Now my } personal opinion: I wonder why TEM would be more } appropriate than SEM to study the distribution } of nanotubes at the surface of sand particles. } And finally, my usual crazy idea: why not try to } "digest" the sand, leaving only the nanotubes? } You cannot analyse the interface between } nanotubes and sand anymore, but if the nanotubes } are dense enough their organization may be } conserved. It is better than nothing! Let's } suppose that the nanotubes are made of carbon, } they are probably inert to any treatment. } Following my fellow colleagues (chemists and } geologists), digesting sand is not an easy task } though. They suggest something like concentrated } NaOH. Just my 2 cents, not a lot worth. Stéphane } ----- Original Message ---- From: } "bozzola-at-siu.edu" {bozzola-at-siu.edu} To: } nizets2-at-yahoo.com Sent: Saturday, December 20, } 2008 12:22:53 AM Subject: [Microscopy] TEM: } sectioning sand } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } The Microscopy ListServer -- CoSponsor: The } Microscopy Society of America To } Subscribe/Unsubscribe -- } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver } On-Line Help } http://www.microscopy.com/MicroscopyListserver/FAQ.html } ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- } I've cut some hard specimens over the years but } never sand. We have a researcher who wishes to } look at a section of a sand grain to study the } distribution of nanotubes on the surface. Any } suggestions on sectioning a grain of sand? } Here's what I am planning: embedding in hard } Spurr resin old, 50 degree diamond knife 2 } mm/sec cutting speed Thanks, JB -- } +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ } John J. Bozzola, Ph.D., Director Integrated } Microscopy & Graphics Expertise (IMAGE) Southern } Illinois University 750 Communications Drive - } MC 4402 Carbondale, IL 62901 Telephone: } 618-453-3730 } +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ } ==============================Original } Headers============================== 8, 17 -- } From bozzola-at-siu.edu Fri Dec 19 17:19:43 2008 8, } 17 -- Received: from cstmta3.siu.edu } (cstmta3.siu.edu [131.230.1.3]) 8, 17 -- by } ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with } ESMTP id mBJNJhJX008553 8, 17 -- for } {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 } 17:19:43 -0600 8, 17 -- Received: from } [131.230.177.136] (ws177136.microscope.siu.edu } [131.230.177.136]) 8, 17 -- by } cstmta3.siu.edu (Switch-3.3.2/Switch-3.3.2) with } ESMTP id mBJNJe5s027174 8, 17 -- for } {Microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Fri, 19 Dec 2008 } 17:19:42 -0600 (CST) 8, 17 -- Mime-Version: 1.0 } 8, 17 -- Message-Id: } {a06240812c571db4cd407-at-[131.230.177.136]} 8, 17 } -- Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 17:19:36 -0600 8, 17 } -- To: Microscopy-at-microscopy.com 8, 17 -- From: } "John J. Bozzola" {bozzola-at-siu.edu} 8, 17 -- } Subject: TEM: sectioning sand 8, 17 -- } Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; } format="flowed" 8, 17 -- X-Spam-Score: 0.00% 8, } 17 -- X-MASF: 0.00% 8, 17 -- X-Whitelist: 0.00% } ==============================End of - } Headers==============================
John J. Bozzola, Ph.D., Director Integrated Microscopy & Graphics Expertise (IMAGE) Southern Illinois University 750 Communications Drive - MC 4402 Carbondale, IL 62901 Telephone: 618-453-3730
As already said, we have the possibility to use different buffers, and it is a chance! Because each one has its advantages and drawbacks and is more suited for one application or the other. I think that for a class this fact is important to teach. Cacodylate is dangerous and must be manipulated accordingly, but in the end it must be manipulated just like any other hazardous substance! There is no specific manipulation just for cacodylate alone! In my opinion (just my opinion), cacodylate is mostly used because of inertia force ;-) In some labs, there is not way, no argumentation which can change the opinion of the boss: he always used cacodylate and always will. In my opinion (just my opinion), it would be good if we could forget about cacodylate as a "classical" buffer, especially for students. This way the next generation will be more prompt to use other buffers and perhaps keeps the cacodylate buffer just for special application, but not as part of a "classical" protocol. In the end, teaching is less about perpetuating the same things forever than about learning the basics to allow improvements (I hope this sentence is grammatically correct).
Stéphane
==============================Original Headers============================== 5, 22 -- From nizets2-at-yahoo.com Wed Jan 14 03:23:26 2009 5, 22 -- Received: from web110805.mail.gq1.yahoo.com (web110805.mail.gq1.yahoo.com [67.195.13.228]) 5, 22 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with SMTP id n0E9NQ0F027906 5, 22 -- for {microscopy-at-microscopy.com} ; Wed, 14 Jan 2009 03:23:26 -0600 5, 22 -- Received: (qmail 45666 invoked by uid 60001); 14 Jan 2009 09:23:25 -0000 5, 22 -- DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; 5, 22 -- s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; 5, 22 -- h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-ID; 5, 22 -- b=V+D0yzi+QYhmvS7FRIWZPMCwbMurltyT/jqfNFjg79+PojhpWJ5J8fMb6atmCBM3yaMZKl6tiXP3cVhJrs6uka7nleXFyGk4FgygfWDSVLrdm0Ad1XEgNHVzGjM9msx6U219KoXYI39lTHGnFiYOyc/rRqJQHoJrcPtsEV4sBLA=; 5, 22 -- X-YMail-OSG: G.AZbNAVM1nB2XGiCf81LO69HKNHF8FBuKsLYkciMpQMnFcPqdmW9xWRTw9HyG5zaBMfjik1kP49iBfeGhTsai1ir0p2.JMEuW3cjDByKwwJWNU6pWqdQdeqwE.hjFS3G9kvPP4U.EJIf9R88s8TQa5V2j7AK3lji_iBQvoebTF0DoPo2mp2pP1D65OIDQ-- 5, 22 -- Received: from [80.122.101.100] by web110805.mail.gq1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Wed, 14 Jan 2009 01:23:25 PST 5, 22 -- X-Mailer: YahooMailRC/1156.77 YahooMailWebService/0.7.260.1 5, 22 -- References: {200901100431.n0A4Ve2v020832-at-ns.microscopy.com} 5, 22 -- Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 01:23:25 -0800 (PST) 5, 22 -- From: Stephane Nizet {nizets2-at-yahoo.com} 5, 22 -- Subject: Re: [Microscopy] RE: Cac buffer and undergrads - chancy? 5, 22 -- To: microscopy-at-microscopy.com 5, 22 -- MIME-Version: 1.0 5, 22 -- Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 5, 22 -- Message-ID: {819009.45662.qm-at-web110805.mail.gq1.yahoo.com} 5, 22 -- Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit 5, 22 -- X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.microscopy.com id n0E9NQ0F027906 ==============================End of - Headers==============================
I have a user who needs to use an SEM with a cryo-stage. Should be a short project needing say a single afternoon (freezing, prep, imaging). Unfortunately we do not have a cryo-stage on our SEM's.
Does anyone have or know of one for use - hopefully within a day's drive of Oxford Ohio (Think Cincinnati).
Thanks Richard E. Edelmann, Ph.D. EXPO Editor, Microscopy and Microanalysis Supplement Electron Microscopy Facility Director 364 Pearson Hall Miami University, Oxford, OH 45056 Ph: 513.529.5712 Fax: 513.529.4243 E-mail: edelmare-at-muohio.edu http://www.emf.muohio.edu
==============================Original Headers============================== 4, 29 -- From edelmare-at-muohio.edu Wed Jan 14 08:39:42 2009 4, 29 -- Received: from spamfirewall.muohio.edu (walrus.mcs.muohio.edu [134.53.6.27]) 4, 29 -- by ns.microscopy.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.8) with ESMTP id n0EEdgml021011 4, 29 -- for {microscopy-at-Microscopy.com} ; Wed, 14 Jan 2009 08:39:42 -0600 4, 29 -- X-ASG-Debug-ID: 1231943557-235a00b10000-Dem1zR 4, 29 -- X-Barracuda-URL: http://spamfirewall.muohio.edu:80/cgi-bin/mark.cgi 4, 29 -- Received: from mulnx23.mcs.muohio.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1]) 4, 29 -- by spamfirewall.muohio.edu (Spam Firewall) with ESMTP id 3590FEEB8536 4, 29 -- for {microscopy-at-Microscopy.com} ; Wed, 14 Jan 2009 09:32:37 -0500 (EST) 4, 29 -- Received: from mulnx23.mcs.muohio.edu (mulnx23.mcs.muohio.edu [134.53.6.10]) by spamfirewall.muohio.edu with ESMTP id uom