Message Board Archive

The Laboratory Robotics Interest Group Home

This message board was active in 1997-98. It was replaced by the Discussion Web.

	Name: Audrey Pearson
	Title: Research Manager - Life Sciences
	Company: Fisher Company, UK
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 12/3/98
	Subject: Lab on a chip, (LOC)
	Comments: I am very interested in 'Laboratory on a chip' technology from the perspective of an equipment supplier. I am interested in understanding better the likely impact of LOC on usage of equipment and reagents and also possible opportunities such developments could present. Would appreciate hearing from any interested parties.

	Name: Elize M. Lubbe
	Company: Plant Protection Research Institute, Republic of South Africa
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 11/22/98
	Subject: Establishing a natural products screening lab
	Comments: We are planning to establish a lab to screen natural products of South Africa in a large national bioprospecting program. High throughput screening is an area totally new to South Africa and the very first step was to attend ISLAR and find out what it is all about. As you might know, it was a bit too technical for someone like me just endeavouring HTS and some of the basic principles have not been covered. We are looking into the discovery of novel agrochemical products, and the agrochemical divisions were also not presented as well as I hoped it would be. To draw up a proper budget and business plan for our proposal we need to have some answers to certain questions, but we are isolated from the technology and expertise. If you can't help me, please could you refer me to someone that could or perhaps throw this open to some kind of discussion? 1. What targets are used in screening for fungicides, insecticides and herbicides? 2. Is it whole organisms or can you also use specificity assays like in the pharmaceutical screening? 3. If you can use some of those assays, which are they? 4. Are they proprietary or is there some general information available? 5. What is the most appropriate hit ratio we should use? (I gathered that you can set it yourself) 6. How do you screen for large molecules (proteins)? Thanking you in advance!!

	Name: Kim Davis
	Company: Digene Corp.
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 10/29/98
	Subject: Robotics in a clinical laboratory setting
	Comments: I am looking for feedback from anyone using an automated system in a clinical laboratory setting. I am especially interested in a Rosys system, but info on other systems would be welcome.

	Name: Robert J. Kreitman, M.D.
	Company: NIH
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 10/22/98
	Subject: 96-well pipettor
	Comments: I once saw an ad for a non-electric 96-well pipetter that simply fits onto an entire box of 96 pipette tips and pipettes an entire 96-well plate at once. I cannot find this product again. Has anyone else seen it?

	Name: Ph. VAYER
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 10/2/98
	Subject: Automation of CaCO2 experiments
	Comments: Has someone automated Caco2 experiments? If yes which kind of robot do you use. Thank you in advance.

	Name: Daniel Coulter
	Company: L G Biomedical Institute
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 9/18/98
	Subject: HTS methods development
	Comments: We're interested in obtaining books, manuals or classroom experience on HTS methods development. Besides the "Journal of Biomolecular Screening", which resources could you recommend or offer?

	Name: Victor Holland
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 9/1/98
	Subject: Plate sealing and bar coding
	Comments: Is anyone using plate sealing and/or print and apply barcoding on microplates in an automated system? I am interested in hearing your experiences using what is on the market now. Thanks!

	Name: Jennifer M. Biesterfeldt
	Company: Mayo Clinic
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 8/4/98
	Subject: DNA Purification
	Comments: I am a research technologist at Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, AZ. We are currently interested in automating the purification of DNA from tissue samples. I would appreciate any information which would further our pursuit of this goal.

	Name: Brian Ruf
	Company: E & K Scientific Products
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 8/1/98
	Subject: Zymark tips used on the Multimek
	Comments: I have heard it is possible to use the Zymark certified pipet tips on the Beckman Multimek, instead of the recommended Robbins tips. Is anyone successfully doing this? I understand there is some modification to the robot required.

	Name: Andy Hopwood, DNA automation group, Research And Development
	Company: The Forensic Science Service, Birmingham, UK
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 7/18/98
	Subject: Automation-friendly sample tube
	Comments: We have automated systems under development/in validation phase for 1. DNA quantification, dilution and PCR set-up and 2. Preparation of PCR product for 48 or 96-lane gel running (ABD 377). Our next project will be DNA extraction from a pressed paper buccal scrape. I would like to be able to extract DNA from the sample matrix in the sample submission tube (currently standard 1.5 ml mictrocentrifuge tube). To this end, we require a new sample tube type (preferably in polypropylene) that allows penetration of the cap with a standard 200 痞 disposable tip to allow addition and removal of lysis solution. Does anybody have any suggestions?

	Name: Kerry Armour, Product Manager, CytoFluor Products
	Company: PE Biosystems
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 7/17/98
	Subject: HTS manual
	Comments: I'm looking for a good review article or website or short book publication or something that provides a good background education on what High Throughput Screening is and why it's important to pharmaceutical development. The intent is to use this as a training tool for sales people that are selling into this enviroment. They need a 50,000 foot view of what screening is and have an idea about the assays used. Explanations of acronyms like SAR and the like is also helpful!

	Name: David Meyer
	Company: Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc
	Email: [email protected]
	Web Site: http://www.mlnm.com/
	Date: 6/25/98
	Subject: 96 Channel Transfers
	Comments: I am looking for a machine that will transfer liquid from one 96 well plate to another 96 well plate, ideally with a 96 channel head. I also need this machine to be able to change tips after every plate. So ideally it would be a PlateMate with the ability to change tips, and stackers which will hold up to about 50 plates.

	Name: Dr. Alexei Yu. Tyurin
	Company: N.D. Zelinsky Institute of Organic Chemistry of Russian Academy of Science
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 6/11/98
	Subject: CombiChem Compounds
	Comments: I represent a division in N.D. Zelinsky Institute of Organic Chemistry of Russian Academy of Science, the biggest chemical center in Russia. This division was recently organized and produced reagents for synthesis and starting compounds for combinatorial chemistry. Our division includes a many qualified chemists and extensive instrumental base. We are able to ensure reliable quality for produced compounds with using modern physicist-chemical methods. If you find this information helpful to your business please let me know and I will send you further additional information about us.

	Name: Richard Mateles
	Company: Candida Corporation
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 6/7/98
	Subject: QBot(?)
	Comments: I've been told about some robotics manufactured by a company whose name sounded like QBot. I'd like to know a phone number and address for the company, so I can contact them.

	Name: Christian Deschenes
	Company: Molecular BioProducts
	Email: [email protected]
	Web Site: http://www.mbpinc.com/
	Date: 6/6/98
	Subject: Pipette Tips
	Comments: I am a project engineer at Molecular BioProducts (MBP). MBP manufactures pipette tips for manual pipettor and for robotics system. I am responsible for developing new products. Every time I have a new products, I am looking for persons to participate in a final beta testing phase. We usually give free products ( pipette tips) to the persons willing to test the products. I am also interested in listening the users of robotics systems, to see if they have a need for a new products.

	Name: Colin Cook, Section Leader
	Company: State Chemistry Laboratory, Melbourne, Australia
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 6/3/98
	Subject: Pesticide Residue Monitoring
	Comments: Our laboratory is in the early stages of a feasibility study to determine the benefits of automating sample extraction and cleanup in pesticide residue monitoring. We would be interested in hearing from anyone who has done this (or merely attempted it) to find out the benefits achieved, pitfalls for the unwary etc..

	Name: Kevin McKernan, Team Leader of Development
	Company: Whitehead Institute/MIT Center for Genome Research
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 5/5/98
	Subject: Robotics in High-Throughput Seq
	Comments: We at Whitehead/MIT Center for Genome Research, also have experience with all of these robots. I manage the Development Team and we are responsible for The Automation and Biochemistry it performs. We are routinely running 2 and 3 ul reactions into 384 thermocycling plates for ET sequencing. We do this with Packard 104 (slightly modified). These Robots we have found to be extremely reliable, easy to program, and hard to break. These robots have been modified so that 1 z-rod has a 12-channel Cavro driven pipet on it. The Cavros are controlled via RS-232 from the Packard's PC and allow direct firmware commands to be sent to the Cavro's. This allows extreme programming flexibility and the ability to dispense 500nl (I have heard of people doing 100nl 3%CV) by tweaking with backlash and dispense speeds. These robots become extremely flexible with 1 12 channel for bulk work and 3 independent varispan tips for rearraying work. They are all easily integrated with a CRS A465 robot. 3 Packards surrounding a CRS routinely do 20 384 Seq rxn setups an hour! Failure rate = 2% (due to dropped plates primarily) We have sequenced 10MegaBases of finished Seq with these to date. We are currently getting drawings to Packard Instruments to have this model a Production Model. See development web site http://www-seq.wi.mit.edu/development/index.html for code.The canned protocols "easyprep" are generally worthless, but if you want low volume touchoff procedures you'll need to get your hands dirty with C. Packard Multiprobe II- I've been to the manufacturing plant to see these and they are truly a better robot than the old ones. 1536 capable, antirotational rods- all stepper motor based with absolute encoders and great software. -No more easyprep. Tecan Minipreps. Very fast- stepper motor based- No customer support. Reliable but no control over the firmware commands to the Cavros so our low volume reaction becoming more prevalent we will be forced to euthanize this robot. Biochip Processor- Piezo by Packard Instruments. 50pl dispensing easy! Machine gun like in its speed but be prepared to learn a whole new liquid handling theory. Barometric pressure can effect these, so can your breath. It is a very sensitive/accurate instrument and may require you to rethink how your assay is preformed. Qiagen -Biorobot- This is basically a Rosys which mean that it will eventually break down. It is a canned protocol that work right out of the box! We set this up in the morning and had plasmid preps in the afternoon. ARMS- CRS A465- better than the A255- In fact don't waste your time with the small robot. The 6 degrees of freedom offered by the bigger A465 will save you many headaches. This thing we find to be highly reliable, easy to program. Its scheduling software has bugs and the company cannot machine racks or carousels for their life, but they do provide good arms. They are usually very good about PCP drivers for any instrument. Panasonic Arms. Went to their production facility and they had CRS arms building their equipment. The company moves like a slug too. Hydra- Mechanically simple- Slow machine, slow company. *************************************************** These Opinions do not represent the opinions of Whitehead/MIT CGR ***************************************************

	Name: Pete Parsonson, Associate Scientist
	Company: Solvay Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Drug Disposition and Safety
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 4/23/98
	Subject: Connectivity issues between Excel and Laserjet 5 Scriptwriter in a Windows NT/Unix network
	Comments: Does anyone have experience with Finnigan TSQ 7000 LC-MS/MS instrumentation? We have one in our lab that is networked to a UNIX box as the server with three Windows NT 4.0 Workstation clients. We're having a problem with our fonts printed out of Excel. The data goes through the UNIX box before being printed and it cuts off words in the spreadsheet.

	Name: Ashraf Abdelmoteleb
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 4/19/98
	Subject: Robotic Enthusiasts
	Comments: Dear Robotic enthusiasts, I am an Australian resident and currently on a three months visit in the United states followed by a short period in the United Kingdom then South East Asia. The main purpose of this round the world trip to is get information on the international state of laboratory automation and robotics generally and the possibility of pursuing a full time career in that field. The reason which sparked this trip was my failure to find any interesting opportunities in Australia. Unfortunately, automation is still largely (not always) a numbers game and the Australian population (not all of them) has a perception that they don't need it. I have been involved with laboratory automation for the past three years. I set up automated protein purification facilities and was responsible for automation development in a pharmaceutical company in HTS and drug discovery. I am interested in meeting or hearing from any one who would like to help. Thank you

	Name: Frank J. Cann, Ph.D
	Company: Institute of Chemical Defense, US Army Medical Research
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 4/17/98
	Subject: HTS methodology for protease inhibitors or angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors
	Comments: Does anyone know if there is a bibliography or source you could refer me to for HTS methodology which has been published for protease inhibitors or angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors?

	Name: Richard McCormick
	Company: BASF plc
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 3/28/98
	Subject: Novel Dye Synthesis
	Comments: I am currently involved in looking into the automation of various aspects of our (BASF plc) work on novel dye synthesis, in particular automation of synthesis, purification and analysis. Being very new to the field, I would greatfully receive any information regarding Literature, discussion groups and contacts in laboratory robotics in general. From your web site you seem mostly USA based. I am based in the UK and have, as yet, no expertise to offer, but would greatly appreciate contact from your uk members.

	Name: Dr. Balakrishnan Ganesan
	Company: D R D F Pune India
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 3/25/98
	Subject: Combinatorial Chemistry
	Comments: I am a Research Scientist working in the above mentioned organisation. Currently I am in Pursuit of Openings in U.S. and also am interested in carrying out further studies as Post Doctoral Fellow in the Field of Synthetic Organic Chemistry in American or Australian Universities(Preferably). The field of Combinatorial Chemistry has fascinated me and am in search of information regarding the same. Anticipating help from your group I hereby request.

	Name: Jeff Berger
	Company: Airfiltronix Corp.
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 3/25/98
	Subject: Custom Enclosures
	Comments: How great is the need for positive or negative pressure custom enclosures for use with laboratory robotic instruments? Airfiltronix builds these enclosures and would like to hear from researchers and vendors who can provide some insight.

	Name: Harry Cole
	Company: Genevac, Ipswich, UK
	Email: [email protected]
	Web Site: http://www.genevac.com/
	Date: 3/15/98
	Subject: ELISA assays
	Comments: Can anyone tell me if ELISA assays normally require solvent drying in a 96 well plates format and if so, what solvents would typically be used? Also, is there a society or web page dealing exclusively with ELSIA assays. What does ELISA stand for?

	Name: Dr. Leslaw Bieniasz
	Company: Institute of Physical Chemistry of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Molten Salts Laboratory
	Email: [email protected]
	Web Site: http://www.cyf-kr.edu.pl/~nbbienia
	Date: 11/20/97
	Subject: Scientific Literature on Chemical Laboratory Automation
	Comments: I have been looking for the scientific literature (especially review papers) dealing with the subject of the chemical laboratory automation. I would appreciate your advice.

	Name: Andrea Tasso
	Company: Snamprogetti - RICE/RECA, Catalytic Reactions Dept
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 11/16/97
	Subject: Laboratory Robotics Mailing List
	Comments: Is there any mailing list about laboratory robotics ? Please send me information about this. I do research in catalysis, and I am trying to improve our laboratory instrumentation for preparation and testing. You can also pass my request to manufacturers.

	Name: Shantanu Deo
	Company: Panasonic Technologies, Inc. / KMERL
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: re-posted from bionet.software newsgroup 10/3/97
	Subject: HTS Scheduling Issues
	Comments: Hello HTS guru's, I am interested in understanding the scheduling issues involved in High Throughput Screening (HTS). I have a Oper. Research and Comp. Science background, so I would like to basically understand the practical issues that should be considered when modeling an HTS environment for scheduling purposes. For example a basic question I have is do all the compounds in say a 96-well assay go through the same sequence of test ? or can they have independent testing schedules instead of being stuck together by virtue of being in the same assay. Also, is the formation of an assay a factor that can be manipulated in order to get the most throughput (via intelligent scheduling) or is the assay formation pretty much done without consideration to scheduling concerns. Also it would help a lot if someone pointed me to where I can understand all the strange terms like ELISA ? etc. which I keep encountering without developing some kind of inkling as to what they mean. Finally can anyone tell about what kind of scheduling software is currently available and its strong points, limits etc. vis-a-vis static and dynamic scheduling in HTS. Thanks in advance. Shantanu Deo -- Panasonic Technologies, Inc. / KMERL, 2505 Meridian Parkway, Suite 200, Durham, NC - 27713. email: [email protected], Phone: (919) 484-9015 Ext. 115 Fax : (919) 484-9045.

	Name: David Ainscough
	Company: Zeneca Pharmaceuticals
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 9/25/97
	Subject: Laboratory Robotics Interest Group in the UK?
	Comments: Does anybody know of a similar laboratory robotics interest group in the UK?

	Name: Tony Kay
	Company: Hill Laboratories
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 9/19/97
	Subject: Automated sample weighing system for our soil and plant testing laboratories
	Comments: I am interested in finding an automated sample weighing system for our soil and plant testing laboratories. Both soil and plant materials are in a dried and ground form. The plants are currently in 150 mL Elkay pottles with lid. The soils are in block bottom paper bags. I realise that with an automated system these containers may need to be changed. The operation to be automated is a standard laboratory weighing procedure. The process will require the robot to: select a container, perhaps open it, take enough sample from it to weigh between 0.100g and 10.00g depending the test, close the container, transfer it to a vessel on a balance, record the weight, empty the vessel into, for example, the appropriate test tube in a nearby rack. We are not in the same league as the pharmaceutical labs that appear to dominate this topic on the Net, so cost is a real constraint. If anybody out there has a system they think is suitable for us, please contact me. Tony Kay Soil & Plant Division Manager Hill Laboratories Hamilton New Zealand [email protected]

	Name: Jorge Carmona
	Company: Odysis SA
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 9/18/97
	Subject: Odysis SA: A New Strategic Partner for Real-Time Rescheduling Technology.
	Comments: A new company, Odysis SA has been formed in Pully, Switzerland, to supply scheduling software technologies and services for building real-time systems for a broad range of industrial, scientific and commercial applications. Timension (tm), the innovative real-time rescheduling engine which is being developed by Odysis, will allow robot and instrument manufacturers, software developers and system integrators to build their time-critical automated applications on a state-of-the-art standardized technology. Timension can optimize automated systems submitted to unpredictable events and a variety of constraints. It will contribute to the development of more reliable, productive and flexible automated systems. Product highlights include: - object-oriented package for NT - interface to C++, Ada95, and VB - real-time rescheduling - priorities - conditional processing - timeouts - consumable resources - resources with limited life duration - resources with calendar - time-windows and must dates - multi-job, multi-batch, multi-process - assembling-disassembling - multi-level exceptions handling - crash recovery - real-time and simulation Odysis SA, Case Postale 326, CH-1009 Pully, Switzerland, Phone: +41 79 206 7369, Fax: +41 79 0 206 7369, E-mail: [email protected]

	Name: Matthias Schick
	Company: DKFZ Heidelberg, Abt. Molekulare Genomanalyse
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 8/21/97
	Subject: Diploma Thesis and the Beckman Biomek 2000
	Comments: Dear biomek users all over the world !! I'm the german student writing my diploma thesis about the Biomek 2000 in a department of the DKFZ Heidelberg, which is the called Resource Centre of the German Human Genome Project. We use this robot for the basic molecular-biological methods done routinely in large scale in the lab like PCR for vector-insert-size determination, sequencing reactions, DNA digests and so on. Most of the projects are realised meanwhile (see informations below) and I want to write down the results. As an introduction I want to give the reader a short overview about the usage possibilities of the Biomek-system or other lab robots existing all around the world. To get these informations I decided to try this e-mail opinion poll. If you wish I can of course mail you back the results/adresses you are interested in. Moreover you can ignore all the questions you don't want to answer or you can define publishing restrictions. These are the questions I would be very happy for you to answer. 1) name and adress of your lab/company/department. 2) main research targets and working fields 3) type of the used lab robots and their usage 4) experiences with an enlargement of the biomek 2000-system by introducing non-Beckman- or Beckman-devices 5) problems apeared during every day use 6) possible improvements of the system 7) degree of satisfaction Now following the promised descriptions of our Biomek-tuning-projekts. We integrated an agarose-gel-system by using Bioscript. Therefore we used a gelbox called "The Centipede" (Owl Scientific Inc.) and a self designed mobile tray connected with the workstations surface plate.We are now possible to run 96 samples + 4 markerlanes for insert checking or 192 samples + 8 marker lanes for PCR-checking. The gelrun can be started by pressing a switch with the Sideloader. Furthermore we constructed and installed a cooling-system consisting of a cooling plate and different metalblocks for 1.5ml Eppendorf-tubes and PCR-Microtiterplates. It covers 2 positions e.g. A3 and B3 and is completely integrated into the BioWorks-System so comfortable usage is possible on every place of the workstations surface just depending on the length of the tubing for the cooling water. We also managed to integrate a MJ-Research PCR-machine with a self-closing lid into a Sideloader stack area by manufacturing a special holder. With these extensions it is possible to run a complete pcr-insert-checking-reaction starting with pipetting the reaction on the cooling-system, transporting the plate into the thermalcycler, running the PCR-programm, taking out the plate and finally loading the samples on the gel and starting the gel run. The best pcr-plates for this purpose are the TubePlates from Biozym Diagnostik GmbH Oldendorf (Germany). This product is based on the 96-well-format with individually movable tubes so it can adapt itself to the different racks and plateholder and easy takeout is possible. If you would like more information we would be happy to answer your questions. Thank you very much for your time. Sincerely yours Matthias Schick DKFZ Heidelberg Abt. Molekulare Genomanalyse -RZPD- Im Neuenheimer Feld 506 69120 Heidelberg Germany Fax: 06221/42-4704 Tel.:06221/42-4703 or -4701 or -4700 e-Mail: [email protected]

	Name: Quan Nguyen, Associate Scientist
	Company: Glaxo Wellcome Inc.
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: re-posted from bionet.genome.autosequencing newsgroup 8/13/97
	Subject: Hydra 96 Pipettor from Robbins
	Comments: is there anyone out there using the hydra 96 pipettor from robbins scientific to pool their reactions? specifically i am genotyping microsatellites and am looking for an alternative for pooling. we currently have a biomek performing that operation but things could go a bit faster with a 96 channel tool. unfortunately the model i have - the 280 ul volume, does not seem to allow me to aspirate only 2 ul from a microtiter plate and dispense that same amount of volume. does anyone have a suggestion on how i can aspirate only small volumes and recover the full amount without having to aspirate the whole pcr reaction? thanks quan nguyen, associate scientist department of human genetics glaxo wellcome inc. 5 moore drive rtp, nc 27709 email: [email protected] phone: (919) 483-0776 fax: (919) 483-0315

	Name: David R. Fermin
	Company: Northwestern University Biomedical Engineering
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: re-posted from comp.lang.tcl newsgroup 7/29/97
	Subject: Tcl scripts and the Beckman Biomek 2000?
	Comments: I recently began working with the Beckman Biomek 2000 Laboratory Automation Workstation and I learned that Tcl scripts could be interpreted by the workstation software. I would like to design a program which would, on a 48-well plate, aspirate media from one row of wells (using one 1000 uL tip and without leaving the plate), then purge the media, change tips, and deliver phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) to all the wells in the row in a repeat-pipet fashion. This would be an extremely valuable function because it could be used in almost any cell-based assay, and there are currently no provisions for such an operation in the software short of spending an exorbitant amount on the Wash-1 tool. I have seen some Tcl scripts for the Biomek and I know that this could be done; I was wondering, though, if anyone with experience could tell me the best way to go about designing the code. It seems pretty tedious to have to find the exact absolute XYZ position of every single location to which the robot has to travel! If anyone can be of any help, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks!

	Name: Simon Smith
	Company: SmithKline Beecham, UK.
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 7/21/97
	Subject: liquid dilution system for automated UV analyses
	Comments: Can anyone give me the name and phone number of a vendor who can provide a cheap reliable liquid dilution system for automated UV analyses. We are basically looking for an advanced autoinjector for our UV spectrophotometer. Thanks, in advance.

	Name: Tom McCloud
	Company: SAIC/ Frederick Cancer Research
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 7/9/97
	Subject: Feeding vials to a robotic pipetting station?
	Comments: I just took delivery of a TECAN Genesis 150 high speed robotic liquid handling system. Although the robot arm would allow vials full of dissolved sample to be moved onto the pipetting station, I had the idea that a continuous belt, such as is used to move vials in a liquid scintillation counter into position, might be a significant improvement. Has anyone been down this path already? Can you share your experiences, either good or bad? Will be glad to provide more info to anyone interested in pursueing this in greater detail.

	Name: Dylan Horvath
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 7/7/97
	Subject: Biological Actuators
	Comments: While I understand that this is not an area of direct interest to your group, I was wondering if any of your group members know of work being done by biotechnologists or biochemists in the area of robotics or industrial use of biotechnology. I am specifically interested in any work being done to create actuators (artificial muscles, for example) using biological models or processes.

	Name: Harry Cole
	Company: Genevac
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 7/1/97
	Subject: Evaporation Systems
	Comments: At Genevac we manufacture high throughput vacuum evaporation systems for use in combinatorial chemistry and natural products research. These systems can be automated. Please contact me if you would like to know any more about these systems.

	Name: Melody L. Jones
	Company: Interactive Medical Technology
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 6/30/97
	Subject: Tissue Processing
	Comments: We are looking to increase efficiency & automate the mundane steps involved in tissue processing. We are looking for a machine which can add reagents, lift samples to be sonicated, aspirated, etc. We are just beginning our search and would appreciate any information. Thank you

	Name: Edge
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 7/21/97
	Subject: reply to: Beckman Biomek Interfacing
	Comments: Beckman has an Integration Specialist named Jeff Cahlik in Fullerton, California. He can probably help you a), determine if your device can be integrated and b) determine the best path to acheive it's integration. FYI, I have experience with both the TomTec Quadra and the Sagian Multipette. In the final analysis it really comes down to flexibility... I suggest looking for the most flexibility you can get from the software. Every manufacturer has to meet their stated specifications or they are in violation from regulatory agencies. The question is, is pipetting water the same as pipetting say, glycerine? Probably not, so you need the flexibility to adapt to the conditions of your assay / method.

	Name: Michael Breslav, R.W. Johnson PRI
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: re-posted from bionet.molecules.peptides newsgroup 6/8/97
	Subject: Synthesizers
	Comments: I am trying to find more info about different synthesizers/sample prep. stations for the optimization of the synthesis in solution. I found Bohdan, Adv.Chem.Tech, Argonaut, Zymark, HP. None of the systems is ideal, but I feel, that HP allows a real time analytical data. However it lacks such features like: constant mixing, inert atmosphere (unless you put the system in a glove box), precipitates handling. I would appreciate your comments on HP or other systems that you familiar with, as well as the direction to other informational resources.

	Name: Mark W. Doring
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: 6/2/97
	Subject: ICAR program
	Comments: As I was looking over the ICAR scientific program that was given last May 14, I noticed a talk that was to be given by H. Berger of Boehringer Mannheim entitled, "Microspot: A Highly Integrated Ligand Binding Assay Technology". As I did not attend, I would be interested in hearing about what this product is all about. I have contacted Boehringer in the US, and they are currently somewhat less than knowledgeable. Any information would be greatly appreciated.

Date: re-posted from Usenet 5/29/97

Comments:
Has anyone out there written a labware description for the Biomek 2000 which allows use of 384 well microtitre plates? And is willing to share it? I've asked Beckman and they say yes, but the software upgrade is unlikely to be ready before end '97 and of course will cost approx $2500!

Thanks

Paul Denny
MRC Mouse Genome Centre
Phone: 44-(0)1235-824535 (direct line)
Harwell, Didcot 44-(0)1235-834393
Oxon. Fax: 44-(0)1235-824540
OX11 ORD email: [email protected]
UK URL: http://www.mgc.har.mrc.ac.uk/

	Name: Carey Cunningham
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: re-posted from Usenet 5/2/97
	Subject: Robotics PCR stations
	Comments: Does anyone have any information on, or experience of, robotics PCR stations? We are considering a purchase and I'd like to hear of experiences with them, pros and cons in general and of specific models. In particular, what level of throughput (samples per day) is required to justify setting the robotics station up? Carey Marine Laboratory Aberdeen, UK

	Name: Tony Major
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: re-posted from Usenet 4/29/97
	Subject: Resuspending samples?
	Comments: I am curious to know what mechanical aids other people are using to resuspend samples... We have used both a Biomek 2000 and an 8-channel finnpipette, but both have their advantages and disadvantages. The Biomek is accurate but slow and expensive to operate and the finnpipette is inaccurate but inexpensive. Anybody else have an accurate/fast alternate to dispensing that blue dye into 96 well plates that works? -Tony Lab Tech UT Southwestern Medical School Genome Science and Technoloy Center

	Name: Stuart
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: re-posted from Usenet 4/29/97
	Subject: Robot Reply
	Comments: Hello All, At last, the reply to the question I posted all those months ago (!) summarised for you. First up I'd like to thank all those people who replied to my postings it was good of you all to take the time and effort to write to me and volunteer your opinions. Next up I suppose I'm going to have to include all the usual disclaimers (you know the story by now) - this document does not represent the opinion of my employers, some of it doesn't even represent my own opinions...I'm only passing them on and removing the names. I've tried to make everything fair, but not everybody out there with robots replied, so some sections may slant one way or another a wee bit! In the last few months I've spoken to people seen machines, and even tried one of two and the best advice I can give is that if you are looking for a system talk to your local reps and see for yourself. In the mean time feel free to use this as a guide to what other people out there are using. Oh, just before the main body of this message, in the course of this I spoke to someone who reminded me that what these machines actually do is mechanise the process of template prep, reaction set-up, and cycling (depending upon the platform used). None fully 'automate' the process into one 'dynamic whole'. Perhaps a solution to this would be to PCR up the fragment of interest, and then go into sequencing...it could all be done in a stand alone system...perhaps this should be kept in mind! Here goes...(in no particular order) Biomek 2000 There is a dye terminator (DT) protocol fully functional for the Biomek, and now DNA preps available too apparently you can perform plasmid isolation for $0.45 instead of $3-$4. This platform is quite easy to use, but it should be noted that labware specs need to be fairly exact - tips can be bent. Also, comes with a variety of 'tools' - although the 2005L acts more like a 1255L tool when used with barrier tips. Also there were some reports from users with respect that handling volumes below 55L does not fair well in some peoples hands. The Biomek set-up time is roughly 25 minutes for 192 sequencing reactions with single primer from a master mix. Perhaps useful with shotguns but set up time for anything else maybe too great (too many variables). The Biomek is actually designed as a high throughput repetitive 96-well based screening platform, so varying numbers of samples on a day to day basis may present a problem. The machine itself is said to be reliable, and doesn't miss wells too often. The operating software is OK - being the usual, point-and-click type which makes operation easier for first-timers! Overall, a good, versatile platform, but some users point to it being perhaps too slow for anything other that repetitive 96 well shotgun work. ABI 877 There are two types of robot in circulation from the producers of the 373a and 377 (oh! and the 310...) - that Catalyst and the 877. The catalyst (which I believe no longer available) was blessed with a not too great user interface which was very inflexible. However reports allege that the 877 has much improved software, it now being an easy to use user interface (again of the point and click variety), the overhaul resulting in a more flexible platform than the Catalyst. This platform has a high throughput capability, and seems to be primarily designed to be used for high throughput genotyping projects that require each sample to be run with multiple markers (either one at a time, or multiplex) and the software reflects this. In general the software is liked by most people - being clear and easy to follow. The 877 seems to have been the only machine anyone reported as being happy pipetting volumes below 35L with...as the 877 seems to have been specifically designed to be used as a small volume pipetter and, with ever increasing cost saving needed as well as better enzymes and dye incorporation, smaller volumes may become more vogue than at present. It should also be noted that there is no disposable tip option with this platform - just a steel needle which, although ABI say no carry over is present, some people report worries over. Also there is no multi-tip option unlike other platforms. Other reported problems seem to be mainly based around leaks and suchlike - although a fairly major problem with M13 forward primer reaction efficiency (and accompanying artefact peak at 70-80 bases) that are unsolved at present, but are possibly due to cycler block contamination. At the time of writing the solution to this is unknown. Packard Muitiprobe 204DT Not too much feedback on this particular machine, but what did get to me indicated that it's a good platform for DT set up ( you can use fixed tip or disposable) but can only be used down to 35L with the small disposable tips, after this volumes are likely to be 'some' rather than a specified amount). Liquid sensing helps when doing DNA preps, but not so much for DT set ups. Possibly some stability problems, but is cheap. Tecan Genesis Again, not too much feedback for this platform either, again it is reported as being good for reaction set up. As for the use of the Tecan it has a cumbersome9 user interface and programming interface. Pipetting below 55L could pose problems unless the tip touching function is used (then goes down to 25L). Set up time is about 1hr for 96 reactions. Very reliable and very flexible, but perhaps it might be quicker to do some things by hand! Qiagen Biorobot The 9600 is an automated template prep machine from Qiagen. It brings with it the reputation of the company that produces one of the most popular DNA prep kits. This robot is basically an mechanisation of the manual prep method, which uses the Qiagen kits on top of a vacuum manifold to speed things up. The 9600 works in multiples of eight or in a 96 plate format. The biggest gripe about the machine seemed to be that in the set-up of samples the software was a bit cumbersome, as it isn't of the 'point and click' variety (you have to write protocols) which means that without extensive effort you can't run samples with different primers with ease. However, all this is supposed to change with an upgrade in the software (due soon), along with the addition of a pump which will halve the current prep time of 96 samples. The 9600 does require some hands-on time mid run - to change over the columns etc. etc. The machine is also capable of setting up sequence reactions, and any other pipetting reactions. This system is also due an upgrade, with a disposable tip option being incorporated. Autogen The Autogen robot gives fairly good results but are slow in comparison with newer types of machine (and maybe more expensive too). Problems occur in their inflexibility with regard to change in demand - protocol development is not easy as they are hard wired into the system. NB This is a miniprep machine and does not set up PCR reactions. Vistra Labstation Again, this reply produced both positive and negative feedback. This platform is this only fully integrated machine that will go from cell pellets to finished reaction without coming off the robot at any point. The Vistra uses a magnetic purification system (called FMP) to isolate the DNA (quick point from someone in the survey - if this is such a good isolation method is anyone using it manually??). The purified DNA is then added to a sequence reaction, which is completed on the machine. There are protocols available for both M13 and ds plasmid work, however the success of them seems to be an issue with some reports of the ds template prep giving problems (one site seems to do manual plasmid preps and use the labstation for it's ss isolation, then set up all reactions on the labstation, as the ds isolation gives them problems). Another report says that it is quicker to perform DT reaction set-up by hand rather that use this robot. On the other hand some people seemed happy with it, and use it for both ss and ds work.

	Name: Daniel MARC
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: re-posted from Usenet 3/23/97
	Subject: pipetting robots-best choice?
	Comments: We are currently using an ABI377 for sequencing analysis and microsatellite-genotyping. The demand is growing fast for both applications and we are considering the purchase of a pipetting robot. Beside the cost of purchase, the criteria that I would consider are: -cost of use (tubes, pipet tips...) -user-friendliness -built-in thermocycler -rapidity and number of reactions -precision and minimal volume -any other useful criteria I would welcome any comment from users with an experience with one of the pipetting robots currently available. Daniel MARC INRA - Centre de Tours 37380 Nouzilly France [email protected]

	Name: Jim Cook
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: re-posted from Usenet 3/16/97
	Subject: Re: Experience with CRS or Staubli robot arms?
	Comments: What specific infomation are you looking for? The Staubli RX family is a group of 6 axis arms with working envelopes from 1200 mm to 3400 mm across. There are industrial and cleanroom (class 1 ) varients. The Controller is based on the Adept MV series and can support many different types of interfaces ( Serial, ether net, digital IO, analog IO and directly through the VME bus).

	Name: Srinivas Akella
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: re-posted from Usenet 3/16/97
	Subject: Experience with CRS or Staubli robot arms?
	Comments: Looking for information on CRS and Staubli robots: ------------------------------------------------- Has anyone had any experience with using robots from CRS Robotics, and in particular, their 5-DOF A255 and 6-DOF A465 robot arms? How about Staubli's RX line of robots? - How easy is it to use and program these robots? - How easy is it to interface to their controllers? - How reliable and trouble-free are these robots? - How easy is it to hook up a commercial force sensor (ATI or JR3) to these robots? -Does a version of RCCL exist for these robots? In fact, is there a version of RCCL for Adept robots? Any info or suggestions would be appreciated. Thanks, -Srinivas [email protected]

ps: While I am at it, what are good alternatives to the Adept SCARA arms? Robots from Seiko, Sony, Panasonic?

	Name: Douglas Gurevitch
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: re-posted from Usenet 3/7/97
	Comments: Hi everyone, We have a lot of robots here, from a number of vendors. My background is in Mechanical Engineering, M.S. in Controls and Robotics. The robots we currently use are: Packard MultiProbe 104 and 204 (not disposable tip), Hamilton MicroLab 2200, PE ABD Catalyst, PBA Flexys, Robbins Hydra 96 (not really a robot), Sagian MultiPette (96 channel pipettor - 6 deck positions), Biomek 2000, CRS T265 (smaller A255 arm on a track). The robots that get used the most are the Packards. They are easy to program and can be customized with a good engineering group (see my abstract for my poster at LabAutomation '97). They have been very reliable (note we do not use disposable tips so I don't know about that configuration). The Biomek 2000 is very good with procedures that need a variety of tools, but has the major flaw that it can not ask the user for input during a run, or dynamically reallocate the procedure for the number of samples (like the Hamilton, Tecan or Packards can). If it is the same procedure every time, they are excellent. Further, they have the best disposable tip handling and options. The Hamiltons are limited in programming capability and were clearly designed for lower throughput than we use them for. We have needed extensive preventative maintenance for them. Admittedly, they are being used 10-12 hours solid every day. The Robbins has been a reliable work horse; however, replacing plunger tips can be a pain. The PBA Flexys (a picking and gridding robot) has been excellent for gridding and more of a problem for picking. I hear that a new picking tool is now available and is more reliable. The MultiPette has a very easy to deal with programming system. It is reliable down to 15l (with the P20 disposable tips) and is already set up to handle 384 well plates. Once again it is not able to dyanmically ask the user for volumes or plates, however the running files are all text. This allows a good programmer to write a user interface that edits these files and then runs the system via the Windows DDE links. I have extensive experience with industrial robot arms (notably Panasonic and Accusembler with some GMFanuc experience). I find the CRS reliable, easy to program (for an industrial arm!) and the company willing to respond to concerns of a customer who will order only a few units. The software also allows for easy communication with other Windows based systems via DDE links. Lastly, the Catalysts are also work horses. They run off-the-shelf and all the time. The only warning is to clean the PCR block twice a month and replace syringes once a week if you are running them all the time (like we do). Now for the systems we don't own. We had an initial negative interlude with the Tecan Genesis just after it was introduced 15 months ago. I have not tried them since so I don't know what they are like now. We do like the RSP/MiniPrep systems and are ordering CAVRO syringe drivers for a number of custom applications. The Gilson does what is promises (septum piercing, etc.) but was too slow for our needs. We have not tried the Q-bot, CyberLab or PSS systems. In terms of arms (a subject I know well) we find the ORCA a little under-powered and small for some of our needs, but the easiest to use for labs with limited engineering personnel. The Mitsubishi's which are being advertised so heavily by Rixan are inexpensive, but are kind of a step child product. Their payloads and accuracies are in between the ORCA and the CRS arms. Note that they were developed for IN-HOUSE production in Japan because big Japanese Karetsu (allied conglomerates) are in general not allowed to buy a competitors equipment! Even the Rixan salesman said they were developed to produce industrial electronics that Mitsubishi sells for $9million/month. Some of the Mitsubishi sales force convinced corporate to sell them to others, but it is only a $9million/year business for a $40billion/year company. Not a lot of support. Another choice in this category is the Panasonic (Matsushita) PanaRobo KS-V20, which I have heard rumors is now controlled by an Adept one controller. If the Adept controller is indeed being used, then the control side is handled by an American automation company with a large installed base. For more information on robotics for the lab, please contact the Association for Laboratory Automation and subscribe for the Laboratory Automation News magazine at P.O. Box 572, Charlottesville, VA, 22908. You can also fax or email the president Dr. Robin A. Felder at (804) 924-5718 or [email protected]. The big ALA meeting is LabAutomation, which for 1997 was held in San Diego last week! Sincerely, Douglas Gurevitch ************************************************************************ The opinions expressed here do not represent the opinions of SEQUANA THERAPEUTICS. ************************************************************************

	Name: Martha C. Nold
	Email: [email protected]
	Http: http://www.cpu.com
	Date: re-posted from Usenet 3/7/97
	Comments: I am developing a class on using the Biomek with an emphasis on Bioscripts and using Tcl commands. We will teach the class over a three-day period with slides, student handouts and a resource guide on Tcl. I am looking for insights and personal experiences that I can include in the class. Can any of you tell me success stories, problem areas or unique uses that I could share with the class? Tell me about your Biomek and what you use it for. I am a technical writer for a computer consulting company in the New Orleans area. Thank you for your help. \| Voice: +1 (504)-889-2784 * * Computerized Processes Unlimited, Inc. \| FAX: +1 (504)-889-2799 * * 4200 S. I-10 Service Rd., Suite 205 \|Metairie, LA 70001

	Name: Shannon Gleason, Ph.D., Bayer Corp.
	Email: [email protected]
	Date: re-posted from Usenet 3/7/97
	Comments: I am exploring the options for ELISA automation. Key features for a system would be: 1. Flexibility: Ease of modifying or writing new assays, accomodation of various labware (eg. tubes, plates) 2. Multiple plate capability: probably 5-10 plates/day for now, but the ability to expand to higher plate capacity in the future 3. Cradle-to-grave assay performance: will perform complete assay (including plate reading) unattended (or with minimal attention) 4. Reliability! I would appreciate any feedback from folks who have experience with some of the systems that are currently available. I am especially interested in hearing from anyone that has tested the new "gripper tool" for the Biomek 2000. Thanks for your help. You may respond here or email me directly.

Send mail to with questions or comments about this web site.
Copyright ?1999 Laboratory Robotics Interest Group Home
LRIG™ is a trademark of the Laboratory Robotics Interest Group
Last modified: February 23, 2009