I have always found that picking worms - even when there are no bacteria on the pick - is a lot easier when I pick worms under a lower magnification, approx. just low enough for the entire small petri plate to be visible in the field of view. Picking worms also tends to get tougher the more I zoom in on the worm when picking.
I figured that’s got to with the amount of pressure I put while picking on the pick (Pasteur glass pipette with platinum wire) at a lower magnification. I wonder if anyone else has experienced the same thing?
Absolutely! that is what I figured out after my senior PhD showed me how to handle worms
and then I was always struggling to pick worms so I mostly ended up killing the worms during transferring them!
But when I tried the lowest magnification all the nightmares stopped!
In other words, choose the way which suits you best! as long as the worms are handled with care and not damaged
(especially if you damage the vulva area then they may even become sterile) then it is ALL fine
It’s definitely easier to pick on lower magnifications.
My theory is rather than it having to do with pressure the lower magnification gives you a bigger field of view so you can be more dextrous.
I Find that if one zooms in on the desired worm then the pick doesn’t become visible until it is almost in contact with the worm.
However on lower magnification the pick is in focus well before it makes contact with the worm due to having a larger focal plane this allows the researcher
to make fine adjustments to the pick position etc in order to efficiently pick the worm. Or at least that’s what I’ve found to be the case. I’d usually pick using an Olympus
dissecting scope at 1.25X mag and find it suits my needs perfectly.
Without really weighing in on the theme of the thread (my position being that people should pick however works best for them), anyone advising a particular magnification (such as 1.25x) should remember to factor in the objective (likely anything from 0.8x to 1.5x) and the eyepieces (likely 10x).
leaving aside Hillel’s observations regarding magnification factors for objectives/eyepieces, I must say that I haven’t laughed so much since I watched Tom Hanks in the Money Pit…especially the scene where the bath falls through the floor at 2:18 in the following clip ;
are we really discussing the fact that it’s easier to manipulate a worm shovel at lower rather than higher magnification here?
Classic lines such as 'I figured that’s got to with the amount of pressure I put while picking on the pick…
or,
‘But when I tried the lowest magnification all the nightmares stopped!’
and my personal favourite…
‘I Find that if one zooms in on the desired worm then the pick doesn’t become visible until it is almost in contact with the worm.’
Come on guys, what’s going on in your labs…these are basic microscope skills that I would want to see in a school class…and not lacking in someone who might get their hands on my expensive confocal (where you would experience a lot of nightmares from your boss when you focussed through the slide!)…
This is a forum where you can access lots of very skilled and dedicated researchers…it’s not Facebook where you share your dissecting scope adventures.
Sorry, but read some of the excellent posts and think more about your questions/observations.
