Chris, indeed nanoITC instrument analysis software is very robust and user friendly (probable more friendly than microcal, GE).
Although when you need to subtract Q (heat) values (from 2 or 3 blank experiments) from your experimental data you cannot. NanoITC software can subtract Q values only from 1 blank experiment. Also if you want to present your data in a form of heat/mol in Y (vertical) axes again you cannot. It presents data in Y axes only in form of heat/injection. If you have found a way to extract 2 or 3 blank experiments from experimental data or present data in form of heat/mol, please let me know it will be very useful. The main problem in the output files from nanoITC come with an extension .nitc, by default. Unfortunately Origin (that can do all the above) can read only, filenames with an extension .itc Cheers, George -----Original Message----- From: Colbert, Christopher [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2013 5:56 PM To: George Kontopidis; [email protected] Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Isothermal titration calorimetry George, would you please explain your comments? We've found the TA Instruments analysis software very robust and user friendly. We have the low volume nanoITC from TA instruments and get equivalent #'s in our comparison tests to the Microcal instrument. Cheers, Chris -- Christopher L. Colbert, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry North Dakota State University P.O. Box 6050 Dept. 2710 Fargo, ND 58108-6050 PH: (701) 231-7946 FAX: (701) 231-8324 On 3/23/13 8:47 AM, "George Kontopidis" <[email protected]> wrote: >Keep in mind that output files from nanoITC, TA instrument cannot be >red by Origin. At some point you will need to analyse your data >further. > >George > >-----Original Message----- >From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of >Anastassis Perrakis >Sent: Saturday, March 23, 2013 12:46 PM >To: [email protected] >Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] Isothermal titration calorimetry > >It might be worth to consider the question more in detail. > >Do you want to study thermodynamics of the interaction, or a KD would do? >If >the former, you need ITC. If the latter, and you want to study things >at the level of KD only, maybe investing on a plate reader, >thermophoresis, or some biosensor technology (spr or interferometry >based systems) should be considered. > >Then, what interactions will you study with the ITC? In general, I >would agree that the lower sample volume is worth the nano options, but >depending on the typical systems under study, sometimes the gain on >sample quantity is not worth the money - while many times its worth it. > >John is if course right that for studying specific systems as the one >he describes the 200 is great. > >A. > >Sent from my iPhone > >On 23 Mar 2013, at 11:00, John Fisher <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I would recommend the Microcal ITC 200, hands down. Not only is it an >amazing instrument with the optional automated sample loader (which is >worth every penny), but we were able to do experiments (multiple) using >FULL-LENGTH p53 binding to a weak cognate protein. I believe this was >the first time ITC was ever used with full length p53, as it is so >labile and just loves immediately to oligomerize. Sample sizes pay for >the instrument. >> Best, >> John >> >> John Fisher, M.D./PhD >> St. Jude Children's Research Hospital Department of Oncology >> Department of Structural Biology >> W: 901-595-6193 >> C: 901-409-5699 >> >> On Mar 23, 2013, at 4:45 AM, Sameh Soror <[email protected]> >>wrote: >> >>> Dear All, >>> >>> >>> I am sorry for the off topic question. I am going to buy ITC to >>> study >protein-protein & protein-ligand interactions.... >>> >>> I am comparing microcal, GE and nanoITC, TA instrument.. >>> any suggestions, recommendations, good experiences or bad experiences. >>>is >there a better system. >>> >>> >>> Thank in advance for the help. >>> >>> >>> Regards >>> >>> >>> Sameh >>> >>> -- >>> Sameh Soror >>> >>> Postdoc. fellow >>> >>> >
