The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

Supra 55 scanning electron microscope

Manufactured by Zeiss
Sourced in Germany

The Supra 55 Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) is a high-performance imaging tool designed for advanced materials analysis. It utilizes a focused electron beam to generate detailed images and data about the surface structure and composition of a wide range of samples. The Supra 55 SEM offers high resolution, versatile imaging modes, and a range of analytical capabilities to support research, development, and quality control applications.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

20 protocols using supra 55 scanning electron microscope

1

Ultrastructural Analysis of M. canis Fungus

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
To determine ultrastructural alterations of M. canis prior to and following FSH1 gene- knockdown, SEM and TEM were used to observe the cultured fungal colonies. Samples were prepared for transmission electron microscopy as described by Basma et al (32 (link)). Electron micrographs were generated using a Hitachi HT7700 electron microscope (Hitachi, Ltd.) at 100 kV. Samples were prepared for scanning electron microscopy as described by Wang et al (33 (link)). Dried colonies were coated with platinum-vanadium and observed under a Supra55 scanning electron microscope (Carl Zeiss AG) at 15 kV. All assays were performed in triplicate.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Isolation and Imaging of Caenorhabditis elegans Spermatozoa

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
To isolate spermatozoa, Mlig020950(RNAi) and GFP(RNAi) worms were relaxed in 7.14% MgCl.6H2O and cut through the testes on a glass slide, using a surgical blade. The cells within the testes were then squeezed out and pipetted onto a poly-l-lysine coated coverslip. After fixation in 2% glutaraldehyde plus 2% paraformaldehyde in 0.1 M sodium cacodylate, samples were postfixed with 1% Osmium tetroxide for 30 minutes at 4 °C. Slides were rinsed three times with water, and dehydrated through increasing concentrations of ethanol. Samples were incubated for 10 min in a 1:1 mixture of absolute ethanol and tetramethylsilane on ice, followed by 10 minutes incubation in pure tetramethylsilane on ice. Samples were air dried, glued on aluminium stubs using double sided carbon tape, sputter coated with 10 nm Pd/Au and imaged in a Zeiss Supra55 Scanning Electron Microscope operated at 5 KV using secondary electron detection (Fig. 2).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

SEM Imaging of Nanoparticle-Exposed Cells

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Cells were seeded in 6 well plate (Corning) with sterilized cover slides in each well that were coated with 8 μg/cm2 rat tail Type I collagen. Monolayers were acutely or chronically exposed to SiO2 NP after being cultured 15 days. The cells were then fixed in 4% formaldehyde and rinsed with PBS. Next, cells were dehydrated with ethanol solution (70 and 100%), transferred to hexamethyl disilizane (HMDS) with a gradient procedure (1:2 HMDS: Ethanol, 2:1 HMDS: Ethanol, 100% HMDS) and dried overnight. After carbon coating, the slides were viewed by the Inlens of a Zeiss Supra 55 Scanning Electron Microscope (Oberkochen, Germany) at 5k eV. Image analysis was performed with ImageJ (Schneider, Rasband and Eliceiri, 2012 ).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Visualization of Lactobacillus-Titanium Nanoparticle Interactions

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Caco-2/HT29-MTX cells were seeded into 6-well plates containing sterilized cover slips coated with 8 μg/cm2 rat tail Type I collagen and cultured for 14 days. The monolayers were exposed to 103 CFU/mL L. rhamnosus and/or 1.4 × 10−4 mg/mL 30 nm TiO2 NP in DMEM for 4 hours. The samples were then fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde, rinsed with PBS, dehydrated using an ethanol gradient (50, 75, 95, and 100%), transferred to hexamethyl disilizane (HMDS) and dried overnight (1:2 HMDS: Ethanol, 2:1 HMDS: Ethanol, 100% HMDS). Samples were then mounted, carbon coated, and viewed using a Zeiss Supra 55 Scanning Electron Microscope at 5000 eV. Six microscope slides per condition were made. Image analysis was performed with ImageJ (Schneider, Rasband and Eliceiri, 2012 ).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Multi-Technique Characterization of Advanced Materials

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The morphology images were recorded on Zeiss SUPRA55 scanning electron microscope (SEM), which combined with energy‐dispersive X‐ray spectroscopy (EDX), and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) (Philips Tecnai 20 and JEOL JEM‐2010 high‐resolution TEM). The optical image was performed on a Leica DMI8 fluorescence microscope. X‐ray diffraction (XRD) data were performed on Shimadzu XRD‐6000 X‐ray diffractometer (Cu Kα radiation (0.154 nm) at 40 kV, 30 mA, and scanning rate of 10° min−1). X‐ray photoelectron spectra (XPS) were performed on a Thermo VG ESCALAB 250 X‐ray photoelectron spectrometer (pressure: 2 × 10–9 Pa; excitation source: Al Kα X‐rays). The aberration‐corrected high‐angle annular dark‐field scanning transmission electron microscopy (HAADF‐STEM) was performed on FEI Titan Cubed Themis G3 300. The Co K‐edge XAS data were collected at the beamline 1W1B of the Beijing Synchrotron Radiation Facility (BSRF), Institute of High Energy Physics (IHEP), and Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS). Contact angle was performed by the sessile drop method in glove box. Crimping and shocking tests were carried out by tablet press (MTI, China) and vortex mixer (TAT, China).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Nanoparticle Characterization Using Advanced Spectroscopy

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Fluorescence spectra were recorded on a fluorescence spectrophotometer (Tianjin, China) at an excitation wavelength of 490 nm and an emission wavelength between 500 and 700 nm. The excitation and emission slits were 5 nm wide, and photomultiplier tube (PMT) voltage was 500 V. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images were captured on a JEM2100F electron microscope operated at 200 kV (JEOL, Japan). Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) measurements were performed on a Zeiss Supra 55 scanning electron microscope. ζ-potentials were measured using a Malvern Nano ZS instrument (Malvern, UK). CNP functional groups were further confirmed via a Nicolet 6700 Fourier transform infrared (FT-IR) spectrometer (Bruker, Germany).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Morphological Analysis of Caco-2/HT29-MTX Co-cultures

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Caco-2/HT29-MTX co-cultures were seeded at a density of 50,000 cells/cm2 and grown for 2 weeks inside 6 well plates (Corning) on sterilized microscope cover slips coated with 8 µg/cm2 collage I. The monolayers were exposed to all concentrations of ZnO NP in DMEM and digests, and fixed after 4 hours in 4% paraformaldehyde in PBS. Next the cells were rinsed with PBS and dehydrated using an ethanol gradient (50, 75, 95,100 and 100%), transferred to hexamethyl disilizane (HMDS) and dried overnight (1:2 HMDS: Ethanol, 2:1 HMDS: Ethanol, 100% HMDS). The cover slips were removed from the 6 well plates and then mounted on SEM mounts (Ted Pella, Inc.), carbon coated, and viewed using a Zeiss Supra 55 Scanning Electron Microscope (Oberkochen, Germany) at 5 keV. 3 microscope slides per concentration were made, and 3 areas per sample were analyzed, resulting in n=9 replicates per concentration.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Spectroscopic Characterization of Materials

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The MB and H2O2 concentrations were measured
by a UV–vis
spectrophotometer (TU1810, Universal Analysis, Beijing, China). H2O2 was determined using the potassium titanium
oxalate method at its maximum absorption wavelength of 400 nm. The
MB concentration was measured at its maximum absorption wavelength
of 664 nm. The standard curves of H2O2 and MB
are shown in the Supporting Information (Figures S3 and S4). The Ni2+ concentration was detected
by an atomic absorption spectrophotometer37 (link) (TAS-990F, Universal Analysis, Beijing, China). The specific surface
area (Brunauer–Emmett–Teller) was measured by nitrogen
adsorption/desorption (Micromeritics ASAP2020 instrument). SEM measurement
was performed on a Zeiss Supra 55 scanning electron microscope.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Caco-2/HT29-MTX Co-Culture SEM Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Caco-2/HT29-MTX co-cultures were seeded at a density of 50,000 cells/cm2 and grown for 2 weeks inside 6 well plates (Corning) on sterilized microscope cover slips coated with 8 μg/cm2 collagen I. The monolayers were exposed to all undigested and digested concentrations of ZnO NP, and fixed after 4 hours in 4% paraformaldehyde in PBS. Next the cells were rinsed with PBS and dehydrated using an ethanol gradient (50, 75, 95,100 and 100%), transferred to hexamethyl disilizane (HMDS) and dried overnight (1:2 HMDS: Ethanol, 2:1 HMDS: Ethanol, 100% HMDS). The cover slips were removed from the 6 well plates and then mounted on SEM mounts (Ted Pella, Inc.), carbon coated, and viewed using a Zeiss Supra 55 Scanning Electron Microscope (Oberkochen, Germany) at 5 keV. 3 microscope slides per concentration were made, and 3 areas per sample were analyzed, resulting in n=9 replicates per concentration.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Microscopic Examination of Bacterial Morphology

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
We employed SEM and TEM for further observation of the morphology, especially for K. kristinae_LC. The original bacterial culture of the strain was centrifuged (12,000 rpm for 2 min), and the supernatant was removed. The harvested cells were washed three times with 0.1 M phosphate buffer (pH 7.2), and then fixed in 2.5% glutaraldehyde solution (SINOPHARM, China) at 4°C overnight. Subsequently, the bacteria were dehydrated in a graded ethanol solution (SINOPHARM, China), dried at the critical point of CO2, mounted on metal stubs, coated with gold, and observed under a Zeiss Supra 55 scanning electron microscope for morphology observation. Bacterial cells were fixed overnight with 2.5% glutaraldehyde at 4°C. After washing with PBS three times, the samples were fixed with 1% osmic acid for 2 h. Then, the cells were washed with PBS three times, and dehydrated sequentially in ethanol at gradient concentrations (50, 70, and 90%) for 5 min at each gradient. Next, the cells were rinsed in 100% ethanol twice for 7 min. After dehydration, the cells were embedded in a resin at 25°C for 4 h. After polymerization at 65°C for 48 h, the samples were sliced and stained with uranyl acetate for 20 min, followed by alkaline lead citrate for 10 min. Finally, the prepared cells were observed under a transmission electron microscope (Hitachi HT-7800, Japan).
+ 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!