The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

71 protocols using cflow software

1

Multicolor Flow Cytometry of Tumor Macrophages

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
For surface marker analysis, TAMs obtained from tumor and monocytes from the spleen, blood and bone marrow were suspended in flow cytometry buffer (1 × 106 cells/mL) and labeled with anti-mouse antibodies F4/80-APC, anti-CD206-PE, anti-CD115-PE, anti-LY6C-FITC. The Supplementary Figure 1 shows the gating strategies used to select the population of interest: monocytes (Supplementary Figure 1A) and tumor macrophages (Supplementary Figure 1B). Isotypes were used as control and the experiments were performed using the same number of cells (events) in all experimental groups. Fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS) analysis was conducted with an ACCURI C6 flow cytometer with CFLOW software (Becton Dickinson, Heidelberg, Germany).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Cell Cycle Analysis of Nanoparticle Exposure

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Cells (2 × 105 cells) were seeded in 24-well plates and allowed to attach for 24 h. Then, cells were treated in presence or absence of nanoparticles (20 µg/mL) for another 24 h. Then cells were harvested, fixed in 70% ethanol at −20 °C, and were then stained with propidium iodide (PI; 50 µg/mL) containing RNase A (30 µg/mL) (both from Sigma) at 37 °C for 30 min. FACS analysis was conducted with an ACCURI C6 flow cytometer with CFLOW software (Becton Dickinson, Heidelberg, Germany).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Nanoparticle Effects on Cell Viability

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Cells (2 × 105 cells) were seeded in 24-well plates and allowed to attach for 24 h. Then, cells were treated in presence or absence of nanoparticles (20 µg/mL) for another 24 h. Fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS) analysis was conducted with an ACCURI C6 flow cytometer with CFLOW software (Becton Dickinson, Heidelberg, Germany). Following incubation, the cells were detached and centrifuged. Then, pellets were re-suspended in FACs Binding Buffer for forward scatter/side scatter (FSC/SSC) light scattering analysis.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Flow Cytometry Analysis of STLV-1 Env

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The flow cytometry analysis of STLV-1 Env expression was performed by an established method as described previously [25 (link)]. In brief, cells were pretreated with FcR blocking reagent (Miltenyi Biotec, Bergisch Gladbach, Germany). For the staining of HTLV-1 Env, mouse monoclonal anti-HTLV-1 gp46 Ab [67/5.5.13.1] (Abcam, Cambridge, United Kingdom) [25 (link)], mouse IgG1 kappa monoclonal Ab (isotype) (Abcam, Cambridge, United Kingdom), and goat anti-mouse IgG-PE Ab (Abcam, Cambridge, United Kingdom) were used in accordance with the manufacturer’s protocol. After staining, a flow cytometric analysis was immediately performed on a BD Accuri C6 flow cytometer with CFlow software (Becton Dickinson, Franklin Lakes, NJ, USA), and the collected data were analyzed by FCS Express 4 (De Novo Software, Los Angeles, CA, USA).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Cell Cycle and γH2AX Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
For cell cycle analysis, combined detached and adherent cells were fixed in 70% ethanol overnight, stained with propidium iodide (Sigma-Aldrich) and analyzed with an Accuri C6 flow cytometer. Data were collected from 20, 000 cells, and analysed with CFlow software (Becton Dickinson)36 (link).
For ɣH2AX estimation, cells were exposed to S. aureus for 2 h and were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde/PBS followed by the permeabilization in 0.1%Triton/0.5% BSA/PBS. Cells then were incubated with Alexa Fluor 647 mouse anti-ɣH2AX (p139) antibody for 45 min and were analyzed as described above. The percent of relative phosphorylation was calculated as fold changes over the control, which was considered as 100%, and multiplied by 100. In some experiments, cells were treated with 10 mM ROS inhibitor NAC (N-acetyl-L-cysteine) (Sigma-Aldrich) 1 h before the infection. A viability and a metabolic activity of S. aureus were not affected by the treatment with NAC since there were no differences between the OD and CFUs of bacterium exposed or not to NAC.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Neutrophil Cell Size Changes

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The change in cell size was determined by flow cytometric measurement of changes in the forward light scatter (FSC) axis of the neutrophils (Accuri C6 flow cytometer; Becton, Dickinson and Company, San Diego, CA, USA). Mean FSC values for stimulated neutrophils were compared with mean FSC values of unstimulated cells in the medium control. Overlapping histograms were generated using the C flow software (Version 1.0.264.21, Becton, Dickinson and Company, San Diego, CA, USA) to make a graphical comparison.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Quantifying NLRP3 Expression in MG-63 Cells

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
For an estimation of NLRP3 protein expression in WT MG-63 vs CASP1−/− MG-63 cells, cells were exposed to S. aureus LAC for 2 h and were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde/PBS followed by permeabilization in 0.1% Triton/0.5% BSA/PBS. After centrifugation, cells were resuspended in 200 μl of 0.5% BSA/PBS, 5 μl of Rat Anti-Human NLRP3 Alexa Fluor® 488—conjugated Monoclonal Antibody (Catalog # IC7578G) or isotype control antibody (Catalog # IC006G) per 106 cells were added, and the samples were incubated for 45 min. NLRP3 expression was analyzed with an Accuri C6 flow cytometer. Data were collected from 20,000 cells, and analyzed with CFlow software (Becton Dickinson) as described (Nguyen et al., 2016 ).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Evaluating Glioblastoma Cell Responses

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Differences between two groups were assessed for statistical significance by Student’s t-test for each cell line independently. TMZ dose response data and sphere growth data were analyzed using a one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with post-hoc Tukey test using MATLAB software (MathWorks, Natick, MA). Neurosphere apoptosis data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA with post-hoc Fisher’s least significant difference test. Flow cytometry data was analyzed using either FlowJo software (Tree Star Inc, Ashland, OR) or CFlow software (Becton Dickinson Biosciences, Franklin Lakes, NJ). Differences were considered statistically significant at p < 0.05. Data shown represents the mean ± standard deviation of three independent experimental replicates.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Quantifying Endothelial Cell Activation

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Following 15d-PGJ2 or MG132 treatments (18 h) and activation with TNF- α (0.2 ng/ml for 6 h), the EC were harvested to be stained for flow cytometric analysis. To block non-specific binding, EC were incubated in 2% BSA in PBS (blocking buffer) for 15 min before adding the antibodies. FITC-VCAM-1, PE-ICAM-1, and APC-E-selectin antibodies (BD, Rankling Lakes, NJ, USA) were used to label EC in 2% BSA in PBS. The antibodies were incubated for 30 min at room temperature. Following two washes with blocking buffer, the cells were fixed in 2% paraformaldehyde. Forward and side scatter gates were established to exclude non-viable cells and cell debris from the analysis. The mean fluorescence intensity of 2 × 105 cells was analyzed in each sample. Auto-fluorescence signals generated by unlabeled cells were used as negative controls in each experiment. Flow cytometric analysis was performed on an Accuri C6 instrument and analyzed with CFlow® Software (Accuri, Ann Arbor, MI, USA). The data were expressed as median fluorescence intensity of three independent experiments.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Multiparametric Analysis of Murine Splenocytes

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Splenocytes harvested from either naïve donor mice or BMT recipients were analyzed pretransplant or on D10, respectively. unless otherwise specified. Splenic cell suspensions were stained for surface T‐cell (CD4, CD8) and activation markers (CD25, CD28, CD62L, CD69) along with intracellular Tumor Necrosis Factor Alpha (TNFα) and Interferon Gamma (IFNγ) and then analyzed by flow cytometry using a four‐color C6 FlowCytometer (Accuri, Ann Arbor, Michigan) as previously described.20 To analyze Forkhead Box P3 (FoxP3) expression, splenocytes were stained with anti‐CD4 and anti‐CD25, fixed and permeabilized, and then stained with intracellular anti‐FoxP3 (eBioscience, San Diego, California). All monoclonal antibodies were purchased from BD Biosciences Pharmingen (San Diego, California) or eBioscience. Irrelevant fluorochrome rat isotype immunoglobulins were used as negative controls. Data were analyzed using CFlow software (Accuri) as previously described.20, 25
+ 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!