I've had a Gryphon for 2+ years and use it in an undergraduate
environment. It's been trouble-free, and there are no instrument
consumables, just blocks and trays. OK, I do have to feed it deionized
water and a PCR tube of diluted protein for each set. It can set a
96-well tray in under 2 minutes. The basic protocol I use is 200+200 nL
drops. The software is easy enough to use that my undergrads know how to
program it to do 1 or 2 drop screens or partial plates. I don't have the
LCP module but you can get that installed or retro-fitted.
I'm pretty sure the acquisition cost of the Gryphon is much less than
the Mosquito and NT8. I squeezed mine on a NSF-RUI grant as project
research equipment.
Cheers,
_______________________________________
Roger S. Rowlett
Gordon & Dorothy Kline Professor
Department of Chemistry
Colgate University
13 Oak Drive
Hamilton, NY 13346
On 10/17/2014 1:56 AM, Dean Derbyshire wrote:
Apologies for the slightly off topic… thought this was the best way to
get views from a wide (relevant) audience.
Any views on differences – pros and cons – and experiences with:
Mosquito; Gryphon and NT8?
And similarly with Minstrel and Rock imager. Related to that last
‘comparison’ what’s the prevailing thoughts on SONICC vs standard UV
laser technology… any experiences with coping phase separation or
condensation ?
Thanks
Dean
* Dean Derbyshire*
Box 1086
SE-141 22 Huddinge
SWEDEN
Visit: Lunastigen 7
Direct: +46 8 54683219
www.medivir.com <http://www.medivir.com>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
This transmission is intended for the person to whom or the entity to
which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you
are not the intended recipient, please be notified that any
dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. If you
have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately.
Thank you for your cooperation.
