Hi Heidi,
I would love to hear other's experience as well. We are currently evaluating both instruments. The demo session for the FX7 was longer, so we were able to play with it more, but we did not have any clumpy cells or dissociated tissue to test. The viability compared to manual counting was accurate.
The Ascend demo was fast and furious (about an hour and a half) but we did have fixed dissociated tissue for that demo. It seemed to do a good job of recognizing cell v/s debris. The live cell counts were comparable to the DeNovix CellDrop-FL, but we didn't have an opportunity to count manually. They have protocols in place for nuclei as well, which will also report the level of "clumpiness."
FX7 also reported on cell clusters (not our data, but provided by Logos) which looked like a graph reporting numbers of clusters containing 1,2,3, etc cells/cluster)
I would love to hear an update on what you decided to purchase.
Regards,
Elizabeth
------------------------------
Elizabeth Hudson
University of Louisville
Louisville KY
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 06-21-2024 14:03
From: Heidi Monroe
Subject: Cell Counter-Luna FX7 vs Revvity Ascend
Does anyone have any experience with either of these cell counters? We're replacing our Nexcelom Cellometer with a more high throughput unit that will provide better accuracy with our 10X fixed cells. In the demos, the FX7 counted the fixed cells with no changes in the standard protocol. The Ascend required a slight boost in brightness, but not the long exposures we need to use for the Cellometer.
------------------------------
Heidi Monroe
Managing Director
Single Cell Core
University of Pittsburgh
------------------------------