Microstructure examinations were performed for the char sample by means of a JEOL JSM-6610LV scanning electron microscope. In order to obtain the most complete microstructural characteristics of the char, both places representative of the analysed sample and areas showing a different microstructure and morphology were examined. Additionally, in the case of particles with a distinctly different microstructure and morphology from the fraction dominating in the char, EDS studies were carried out to identify their chemical composition and, consequently, to identify the type of waste that was the source of these particles. The EDS examinations were conducted using an X-ray microanalyzer by Oxford Instruments working with the JEOL JSM-6610LV scanning microscope.
Jsm 6610lv
Manufactured by JEOL
Sourced in Japan, United States, United Kingdom, Austria, Germany
The JSM-6610LV is a low-vacuum scanning electron microscope (SEM) designed by JEOL. It is capable of high-resolution imaging and analysis of a wide range of samples, including those that are not conductive or require minimal sample preparation. The JSM-6610LV operates at low vacuum pressures, making it suitable for the examination of non-conductive and moisture-containing specimens without the need for a conductive coating.
Automatically generated - may contain errors
Lab products found in correlation
Jfc 1300, by JEOL (6 mentions)
Hcp 2, by Hitachi (4 mentions)
Glutaraldehyde solution, by Merck Group (4 mentions)
Szx16, by Olympus (4 mentions)
Desk 5, by Denton (3 mentions)
D8 advance, by Bruker (3 mentions)
Jfc 1100e, by JEOL (3 mentions)
Nicolet is5, by Thermo Fisher Scientific (3 mentions)
Nicolet 6700, by Thermo Fisher Scientific (3 mentions)
Glutaraldehyde, by Merck Group (3 mentions)
Quanta 600, by JEOL (2 mentions)
Jfc 1600, by JEOL (2 mentions)
Morgagni 268, by Thermo Fisher Scientific (2 mentions)
Autosamdri 815, by Tousimis (2 mentions)
Miniflex 600, by Rigaku (2 mentions)
Miniflex, by Rigaku (2 mentions)
Scd005 sputter coater, by Leica (2 mentions)
Eds x max 80, by Oxford Instruments (2 mentions)
Indesign cs6, by Adobe (2 mentions)
Em scd500, by JEOL (2 mentions)
261 protocols using jsm 6610lv
1
Microstructural Analysis of Char Samples
2
Scanning Electron Microscopy of Nail Plate
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
The surface morphology of the nail plate (dorsal phase and ventral phase) samples were studied through scanning electron microscope (JEOL JSM-6610LV). To make the samples conducting; a thin layer of platinum was coated using an ion sputter coating technique. Samples were observed with the secondary electron (SE) mode at a 10 kV accelerating voltage. The cross-sectional image (after tearing the nail plate sample perpendicular to its side of growth) of the nail plate is also captured through SEM and shown in Fig. 9(B) .
The calcium content was studied with Energy Dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy (EDXS) using a Bruker XFlash 6I30 detector integrated with a scanning electron microscope (JEOL JSM-6610LV).
The calcium content was studied with Energy Dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy (EDXS) using a Bruker XFlash 6I30 detector integrated with a scanning electron microscope (JEOL JSM-6610LV).
3
Comprehensive Electrochemical Analysis of Creatinine
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Cyclic voltammetry (CV) and square-wave voltammetry (SWV) measurements were performed using a potentiostat PGSTAT-10 (Eco Chemie, Utrecht, Netherlands) controlled by the GPES 4.9 software. SPCEs used in this study were purchased from Metrohm Autolab B.V. (DropSens). The SPCEs were composed of a three electrode composition (10 mm × 34 mm), which included a round ended carbon working electrode (4 mm in diameter), carbon counterelectrode, and silver pseudoreference electrode printed on a ceramic support. A ring shaped insulating layer around the round ended working electrode (8 mm) with a capacity of 50 μL was incorporated onto the SPCEs as an electrochemical cell (Figure 1 ). Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was performed using JEOL JSM-6610LV scanning electron microscope. An energy dispersive X-ray (EDX) spectrum was performed using OXFORD INCA350 that was attached with JEOL JSM-6610LV scanning electron microscope. Powder X-ray diffraction patterns were collected from 5 to 55° in 2θ by an X-ray diffraction (XRD) with cobalt Kα radiation (BTX II Benchtop XRD, Olympus). UV-visible absorption spectra of creatinine were recorded by Biochrom Libra S80 Double Beam Spectrophotometer (Biochrom, UK).
4
Characterization of Porous Carbons
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
The morphology of the obtained porous carbons was characterized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM, JEOL JSM-6610LV and JEOL S-4800) operated at an acceleration voltage of 10 kV. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images were obtained using a JEOL JEM-1011 microscope operating at 200 kV. High-resolution TEM (HRTEM) was performed using a JEM-2100 F microscope operating at an accelerating voltage of 200 kV. The crystallographic information of porous carbons was investigated by powder X-ray diffraction (XRD, Rigaku D/Max 2500PC). Raman spectra were collected on a Renishaw inVia Raman spectrometer. X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) was performed on a 1063 photoelectron spectrometer (Thermo Fisher Scientific, England) with Al-Kα X-ray radiation as the X-ray source for excitation. The textural properties were characterized by N2 sorption measurements at 77.3 K (Micromeritics TriStar II 3020). The specific surface area was obtained by Brunauer-Emmett-Teller (BET) method. The pore size distribution (PSD) was calculated by the nonlocal density functional theory (NLDFT) method. The total pore volume (Vtotal) was estimated from the adsorbed amount at a relative pressure p/p° of 0.99. Micropore volume (Vmic) was calculated using the t-plot method.
5
Characterization of MXene Nanolayers
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
XRD analyses were conducted using an X-ray diffractometer (Bruker, D8 Advance X-ray Powder Diffractometer, Cu Kα (λ = 0.154 radiation)) at a scan rate of 4° min–1. The as-prepared MXene nanosheets were characterized by using a high-resolution transmission electron microscopy (HRTEM, JEOL 2010F). The surface morphologies of Mp, Mw, Mp-w-p, and Mw-p-w nanolayers were characterized by using a SEM (FEI Quanta 600) and a field emission SEM (JEOL-JSM-6610LV) operating at 15.0 kV. Surface roughness of Mp, Mw, Mp-w-p, and Mw-p-w nanolayers was measured by AFM (Model: Bruker Dimension ICON). The characteristic crack lengths and the crack densities of Mp, Mw, Mp-w-p, and Mw-p-w nanolayers were quantified by using ImageJ. Fatigue tests were performed on the Mw strain sensor for 2000 cycles under repeated uniaxial strains, which were performed on a tensile tester (Instron 5543, Instron, USA) with a 500 N load cell.
6
SEM Analysis of Mature Seeds
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
For SEM study, mature seeds were mounted on aluminum stubs with double adhesive tape and sputter-coated with gold palladium in a JFC-1600 Autofine coater, JEOL, Japan sputter coating unit. Samples were examined using a Scanning Electron Microscope JSM-6610LV, JEOL, Japan, at the Department of Botany, University of Delhi , India.
7
Identifying ZnO ENMs Adsorption on Microplastics
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
The filtered microplastics were deposited on carbon double‐sided tape and then glued into Al‐cylinder stubs (12.5×10 mm, Agar Scientific). A scanning electron microscope (JEOL JSM‐6610LV) was used to identify potential ZnO ENMs adsorption sites by scanning in backscattering mode (BEC) at 40 Pa. Energy dispersive spectroscopy (EDX) analyses were performed at 20 keV over the regions of interest for elemental quantification (Zeiss). Pristine MPs were initially inspected to ensure that no Zn‐background signal was present pre‐incubation.
8
Examining E. coli Microstructure in Pond Water
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) was used to examine the microstructure of generic E. coli in the pond water using the method previously described by Kenzaka and Tani (Kenzaka & Tani, 2012 ). Briefly, the samples were centrifuged at 10,000g for 5 min, and the pellets were suspended in phosphate‐buffered saline (PBS; pH 7.2). The suspension was passed through a 0.45 μm filter to bind particles present in the water. The filter was dehydrated using an ethanol gradient (70, 80, 95, and 99% v/v, 30 min in each and 2× with 99%), and critical‐point‐dried in a DCP‐1 critical point drying apparatus (Denton Vacuum, Inc.). The filter was mounted on aluminum stubs with double‐stick tape and sputter‐coated with a platinum layer of ~10 nm (Leica EMS550X). SEM was performed using a high‐vacuum scanning electron microscope (JSM‐6610LV, Jeol Ltd.), at 10 kV.
9
Scanning Electron Microscopy of Materials
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
A scanning electron microscope (JSM 6610-LV, JEOL, Japan, working at 5 kV) was used to morphologically analyze the control and MB300 at magnifications ranging from ×100 to ×5,000. The sample was mounted on an aluminum stub using double-backed cellophane tape after being coated with gold–palladium (60:40 w/w) in an auto fine coater, JEOL JFC-1600.
10
Biofilm Visualization and Analysis by SEM
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Biofilms were grown
and treated as described above up to 43 h and then prepared for SEM
analysis. The discs with the biofilms were washed with 0.89% NaCl,
and the biofilms were fixed using glutaraldehyde solution at 2.5%
(1 h at room temperature). Next, the samples were washed three times
with 0.89% NaCl, dehydrated [by incubation on 70% ethanol (1×/1
h), 90% ethanol (1×/1 h), and 99% ethanol (5×/30 min)],
and dried on a silica vacuum desiccator (7 days). After, the biofilms
were metalized with gold (Denton Vaccum, Desc V) and the images were
acquired on amplification of 1000 and 5000× in a scanning electron
microscope (JEOL JSM-6610LV). Each treatment group (formulation) was
represented by two discs, and at least three images of each amplification
were acquired per disc.
and treated as described above up to 43 h and then prepared for SEM
analysis. The discs with the biofilms were washed with 0.89% NaCl,
and the biofilms were fixed using glutaraldehyde solution at 2.5%
(1 h at room temperature). Next, the samples were washed three times
with 0.89% NaCl, dehydrated [by incubation on 70% ethanol (1×/1
h), 90% ethanol (1×/1 h), and 99% ethanol (5×/30 min)],
and dried on a silica vacuum desiccator (7 days). After, the biofilms
were metalized with gold (Denton Vaccum, Desc V) and the images were
acquired on amplification of 1000 and 5000× in a scanning electron
microscope (JEOL JSM-6610LV). Each treatment group (formulation) was
represented by two discs, and at least three images of each amplification
were acquired per disc.
About PubCompare
Our mission is to provide scientists with the largest repository of trustworthy protocols and intelligent analytical tools, thereby offering them extensive information to design robust protocols aimed at minimizing the risk of failures.
We believe that the most crucial aspect is to grant scientists access to a wide range of reliable sources and new useful tools that surpass human capabilities.
However, we trust in allowing scientists to determine how to construct their own protocols based on this information, as they are the experts in their field.
Ready to get started?
Sign up for free.
Registration takes 20 seconds.
Available from any computer
No download required
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!