The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

Photoionization detector

Manufactured by Aurora Scientific
Sourced in Canada, Philippines

The Photoionization detector is a laboratory instrument used to detect and measure the presence of certain chemical compounds. It operates by using ultraviolet light to ionize target molecules, generating an electrical signal that is proportional to the concentration of the detected compounds. The core function of this device is to provide sensitive and selective detection of a wide range of volatile organic compounds and other gaseous species.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

5 protocols using photoionization detector

1

Stimulus Variability Impact on PID Signals

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
In order to determine the influence of stimulus variability, measurements were done with a photoionization detector (Aurora Scientific Inc., Canada) and α-pinene as stimulus because Z7-12:Ac cannot be ionized. Means and SDs of PID signals were measured in amplitude and onset time in 10 series of 14 repeated stimuli, within series using the same stimulus cartridge (pipette, filter paper and load; irregularity) and across series (with different cartridges; heterogeneity). For onset time, the SDs were constant, with heterogeneity (SD  = 13.3 ms) 3 times larger than irregularity (4.43 ms). For amplitude, the SDs were found proportional to the mean amplitude, preserving the constancy of the coefficient of variation (CV  =  SD/mean) at two loads of α-pinene (4 and 5 log ng), with heterogeneity (CV  = 0.195) 4 times larger than irregularity (0.05).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Fly Walking Behavior During Multiphoton Imaging

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
An air supported spherical treadmill setup was used to record fly walking behavior during multiphoton imaging. Male flies at 5–6 days post eclosion were anesthetized on ice for about 2 min and mounted to a coverslip with semicompression as described in Video 1. The cover slip was glued to a custom 3D-printed holder with an internal airway to deliver airflow along the underside of the coverslip directly onto the antenna without interfering with the air supported ball. The air duct was positioned 90 degrees to the right of the fly about 1 cm away. Clean room air was pumped (Hygger B07Y8CHXTL) into a mass flow meter set at 1 L/min (Aalborg GFC17). The regulated airflow was directed through an Arduino controlled three-way solenoid pinch valve (Masterflex UX-98302–42) using 1/16” ID tubing. The valve directed the airflow either through 50 ml glass vile containing 10 ml of undiluted apple cider vinegar for the stimulus, or through a 50 ml glass vile containing 10 ml of mineral oil for the control. The latency from stimulus signal from the Arduino to odor molecules arriving at the fly’s antenna was measured using a photo-ionization detector (Aurora Scientific) prior to the experiments and found to be <200 ms to peak stimulus.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Odor Presentation Dynamics Characterization

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
For odor presentation, odors including isopentyl acetate, 2-butanone, and 1,7-octadiene (Sigma Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) were each diluted in their liquid state to 133.332 Pa (1 Torr) and 266.645 Pa (2 Torr) in light mineral oil (Sigma Aldrich) which also served as the blank stimulus. Stimulus vapors controlled with an air-dilution olfactometer were run from glass headspace vials (100 ml/min) where they were later blended with clean nitrogen (900 ml/min) in the odor port thereby yielding a total odor flow rate of 1 L/min. The olfactometer was equipped with independent stimulus lines up to the point of entry into a Teflon odor port, in order to eliminate chances of cross-contamination of the stimuli and also to allow for rapid temporal control of odor dynamics as they reach the animal. To confirm the dynamics of the odor plume as it leaves the odor port, we used a photoionization detector (Aurora Scientific, Aurora CO). As shown in Figure 3C, odor delivery occurred rapidly, and was largely stable throughout the 4 sec of delivery.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Odorant Delivery and Concentration Measurement

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Odorants (Sigma-Aldrich) were diluted from saturated vapor with cleaned air using a flow dilution olfactometer described previously43 (link). The olfactometer was designed to provide a constant flow of air blown over the nares. Odorants were constantly injected into the olfactometer, but sucked away via a vacuum that was switched off during odorant presentation. Cross contamination was avoided by using separate Teflon tubing for each odorant. Odorants were typically delivered at different concentrations between 0.12 and 11% of saturated vapor, although the odorant methyl valerate was also delivered at 0.04% in one preparation (Supplementary Fig. 2), and ~16% in another (Supplementary Fig. 3). The Odorants ethyl tiglate (Fig. 1), methyl valerate (Fig. 2 and Supplementary Figs 13) or isoamyl acetate were used for the experiments measuring both input and output in the same preparation (details for each measurement are included in Supplementary Table 2). Methyl valerate, 2-heptanone, and isoamyl acetate were used for the data in Fig. 5 that compared the output maps evoked by different Odorants. A photo-ionization detector (Aurora Scientific, Aurora, ON) was used to confirm the time course and relative concentrations presented with our olfactometer. The PID was placed next to the mouse’s nose during the optical recordings.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Precise Olfactory Stimulus Delivery

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
For odor presentation, odors including isopentyl acetate, 2-butanone, and 1,7octadiene (Sigma Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) were each diluted in their liquid state to 133.332 Pa (1 Torr) and 266.645 Pa (2 Torr) in light mineral oil (Sigma Aldrich) which also served as the blank stimulus. Stimulus vapors controlled with an air-dilution olfactometer were run from glass headspace vials (100 ml/min) where they were later blended with clean nitrogen (900 ml/min) in the odor port thereby yielding a total odor flow rate of 1 L/min.
The olfactometer was equipped with independent stimulus lines up to the point of entry into a Teflon odor port, in order to eliminate chances of cross-contamination of the stimuli and also to allow for rapid temporal control of odor dynamics as they reach the animal.
To confirm the dynamics of the odor plume as it leaves the odor port, we used a photoionization detector (Aurora Scientific, Aurora CO). As shown in Figure 3C, odor delivery occurred rapidly, and was largely stable throughout the 4 sec of delivery.
was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder. All rights reserved. No reuse allowed without permission.
The copyright holder for this preprint (which this version posted July 15, 2020. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.17.045013 doi: bioRxiv preprint
+ Open protocol
+ Expand

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

Sign up now

Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!