The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

15 protocols using amyl acetate

1

Dig-Functionalized DNA Control Experiments

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
For control experiments, we used a dig-functionalized DNA construct. The dig handle was constructed in the same matter as the DBCO handle described above, but instead dig-11-dUTP was used (Digoxygenin-11-dUTP, Roche). Coverslips were cleaned in acetone for 30 min in a sonicator for creating the flow cells. After air-drying, they were coated with 1 % nitrocellulose (Invitrogen) in amylacetate (Sigma Aldrich). Application of reference beads and assembly of flow cells proceeded as described above. Next, nitrocellulose-coated flow cells were incubated with 100 mM anti-dig antibodies (Fab-fragment, Roche) for 30 min. After washing as described above, the surface was passivated with 10 mg/ml BSA (Bioke) for 1 h. Preparation of beads proceeded as described above. Beads with digoxygenin-functionalized DNA then incubated in the flow cell for 10 min. Finally, the flow cell was washed with washing buffer until no more unbound beads were visible.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Hormonal Influences on Social Odor Discrimination

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
We speculated that in mice of both sexes circulating gonadal hormones may more readily influence subjects’ ability to discriminate pairs of salient social odors (such as urinary odors from conspecifics) than pairs of non-social odors. Accordingly, we compared subjects’ ability to discriminate between male vs female urinary volatiles in one set of tests and between amyl acetate and peppermint (Sigma Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) in another series of tests. Urine was collected in metabolic chambers from 4 testes-intact male and 4 ovary-intact female mice that were not otherwise included in the study. No effort was made to link females’ estrous cycle stage to the collection of urine. Urine collected over multiple days was pooled and stored at −80°C. Male urine and amyl acetate were arbitrarily chosen as the rewarded (S+) odors; female urine and peppermint were used as the non-rewarded (S−) odors. Odors were placed in 25-ml glass vials at a total volume of 10 ml. Urine was diluted 1:10 in deionized water, while amyl acetate and peppermint were diluted 1:10 in mineral oil. At the end of each day’s testing session the odors were discarded and fresh odors were prepared on the next day of testing.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Odorant Identification Experiments

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All monomolecular odorants used in the experiments (amyl acetate, ethyl butyrate, isoamyl acetate, carvone-, 3-hexanone, acetophenone, and methyl benzoate) were from Sigma-Aldrich. See also Supplemental Experimental Procedures.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Olfactory Bulb Response to Amyl Acetate

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Mice were placed in empty cages, devoid of bedding, food, and water for 1 h in an odor free room. After 1 h, mice were moved to a different room where an open Eppendorf tube containing 60 μl of amyl acetate (Sigma-Aldrich) was taped inside their cage at nose-level. After 30 min, the mice were placed in a new cage without amyl acetate and moved back to the odor free room. The mice were sacrificed by cervical dislocation at different intervals: before amyl acetate exposure, immediately after exposure and 30, 90, and 210 min after exposure to amyl acetate. The OBs were either flash frozen in liquid nitrogen for quantitative real time PCR or placed in OCT medium (Sakura) in a 15 × 15 × 15-mm Tissue-Tek Cryomold (Sakura) and subsequently flash frozen for sectioning and RNA in situ hybridization.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Fluoxetine and Musk Compound Effects

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Fluoxetine (Flu) (Dar Al Dawa Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd., Jordan) was given to the mice, at a dose of 20 mg/kg per day, through intragastric gavage and dissolved in 2 mL sodium carboxymethyl cellulose (0.03%) once per day (Li et al., 2014 (link)).
Musk (M. moschiferus), obtained from one of the trusted shops for musk and perfumes in Jeddah, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA), was utilized in this study. Musk compounds have been defined by gas chromatography and mass spectrometry (GC–MS) (Agilent, Columbia, SC, United States). Just before administration, musk was diluted using propylene glycol 1.0% (vol/vol) as has been previously described (Fukayama et al., 1999 (link)).
Positive control group has been exposed to amyl acetate 5% (Sigma, St. Louis, MO, United States) through inhalation. It was selected because it was safely utilized for testing olfactory detection thresholds in humans (Walker et al., 2003 (link)) and rodents (Fleming et al., 2008 (link)), and it was reported not to have an impact on anxiety (Pavesi et al., 2011 (link)).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Protein Visualization by Negative Staining

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
A drop of aggregated protein suspension at a concentration of 0.1 mg/mL was applied to a carbon-coated collodion film (2% collodion solution in amyl acetate (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA)) on a copper grid (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) and negatively stained with 2% aqueous uranyl acetate (SPI-Chem., West Chester, PA, USA). Samples were examined under a JEM-100B electron microscope (JEOL Ltd., Tokyo, Japan).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Olfactory Discrimination Assay in Mice

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Mice were habituated to a transparent cage with perforated aluminium soil without bedding (46 × 24 × 20 cm) for 20 mins before the test. A paper filter soaked with 10 µl of amyl acetate (1% in mineral oil, Sigma-Aldrich) was presented lying on a Parafilm® sheet for 2 min, three times, with an inter-trial interval of 2 min. Mice were considered sniffing when their nose was directly above the filter paper. On the fourth trial, a new odour (10 µl of eugenol, 1% in mineral oil, Sigma Aldrich) was presented for 3 min. The sniffing times between the fourth and the third trials were then compared. For each mouse, each investigation time was normalized to investigation time during the first odour presentation.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Odorant Profiling for Olfaction Research

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
A variety of monomolecular odorants was selected based on their solubility and previous use in olfactory research involving rats. All odorants (amyl acetate (AA), methyl valerate (MV), ethyl butyrate (EB)) and tastants (HCl, sucrose) were reagent grade and purchased from Sigma (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO). Odorants were stored in the dark under nitrogen. Only AA was tested behaviorally, all three odors were tested using optical calcium imaging.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Odorant Identification Experiments

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All monomolecular odorants used in the experiments (amyl acetate, ethyl butyrate, isoamyl acetate, carvone-, 3-hexanone, acetophenone, and methyl benzoate) were from Sigma-Aldrich. See also Supplemental Experimental Procedures.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Protein Visualization via Electron Microscopy

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
A drop of aggregated protein suspension at a concentration of 0.1 mg/mL was applied to a carbon-coated collodion film (2% collodion solution in amyl acetate (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA)) on a copper grid (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) and negatively stained with 2% aqueous uranyl acetate (SPI-Chem., West Chester, PA, USA). Samples were examined under a JEM-100B electron microscope (JEOL Ltd., Tokyo, Japan). Samples obtained from five independent protein isolations were analyzed; many different fields of view were analyzed.
+ 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!