Optical rotations were measured on a 241 polarimeter (PerkinElmer, Waltham, United States). UV-2102 (Unico, Shanghai, China) was used to record UV data. IR spectra were recorded on an FTIR-8400S spectrophotometer (Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan). NMR data were acquired on a Bruker 500 spectrometer using solvent signal (CDCl3; δH 7.26/δC 77.6) as reference. Sephadex LH-20 and silica gel were purchased from Pharmacia (Biotech, Sweden) and Shanghai Titan Scientific Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, China), respectively. Semi-preparative HPLC separation was performed on a SEP LC-52 with an MWD UV detector (Separation (Beijing) Technology Co Ltd., Beijing, China) packed with a YMC-Pack ODS-A column. HR-ESI-MS spectra were analyzed using an ESI-Q-TOF-MS (Waters Xevo G2-XS QTof, United States).
Uv 2102
Manufactured by Unico
Sourced in China
The UV-2102 is a UV-Vis spectrophotometer designed for accurate and reliable absorbance measurements in the ultraviolet and visible wavelength ranges. It features a high-performance optical system and advanced software for data analysis.
Automatically generated - may contain errors
Lab products found in correlation
241 polarimeter, by PerkinElmer (2 mentions)
Ftir 8400s spectrophotometer, by Shimadzu (2 mentions)
500 spectrometer, by Bruker (1 mentions)
Xevo g2 xs qtof, by Waters Corporation (1 mentions)
Dr890, by HACH (1 mentions)
M 410, by Cole-Parmer (1 mentions)
600 spectrometer, by Bruker (1 mentions)
Lc 6ad instrument, by Shimadzu (1 mentions)
Uplc qtof ms ms, by Waters Corporation (1 mentions)
Ods a column, by Shimadzu (1 mentions)
Synapt g2, by Waters Corporation (1 mentions)
Sephadex lh 20, by GE Healthcare (1 mentions)
J 815 spectropolarimeter, by Jasco (1 mentions)
Silica gel, by Qingdao Marine Chemical (1 mentions)
Chi 660d workstation, by CH Instruments (1 mentions)
Tecnai g2 f30, by Thermo Fisher Scientific (1 mentions)
Graphite flake, by Thermo Fisher Scientific (1 mentions)
L ascorbic acid, by Merck Group (1 mentions)
J 1500 circular dichroism spectrometer, by Jasco (1 mentions)
Li 6400, by LI COR (1 mentions)
13 protocols using uv 2102
1
Characterization of Organic Compounds
2
Coking Wastewater Removal Efficiency
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
The removal efficiency was defined as below:
Here, Co represents the initial concentration of pollutants, and Cf is the concentration of pollutants after treatment. The removal efficiency of coking wastewater was determined using COD, UV254, aVis380. Among them, UV254 represented the unsaturated bond aromatic compounds and Vis380 reflected the content of color ingredients. COD was analyzed through a COD analyzer (DR890, HACH, Loveland, CO, USA). UV254 and Vis380 were represented as light absorbance of 3 mL sample measured with 1 cm quartz cell at 254 nm and 380 nm using UV-Vis spectrophotometer (UV2102, Unico, Shanghai Instrument, Shanghai, China), respectively [28 (link)].
Here, Co represents the initial concentration of pollutants, and Cf is the concentration of pollutants after treatment. The removal efficiency of coking wastewater was determined using COD, UV254, aVis380. Among them, UV254 represented the unsaturated bond aromatic compounds and Vis380 reflected the content of color ingredients. COD was analyzed through a COD analyzer (DR890, HACH, Loveland, CO, USA). UV254 and Vis380 were represented as light absorbance of 3 mL sample measured with 1 cm quartz cell at 254 nm and 380 nm using UV-Vis spectrophotometer (UV2102, Unico, Shanghai Instrument, Shanghai, China), respectively [28 (link)].
3
Characterization of Coking Wastewater Composition
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
The organic composition of coking wastewater before and after IHC or IHC/FO treatment was first characterized using UV-Vis spectrophotometer (UV-2102, Unico, Shanghai Instrument, Shanghai, China) with a spectrometric quartz cell (1.0 cm path length); wavelength varied from 200 nm to 700 nm.
GC–MS was further used to identify the composition of coking wastewater before and after IHC or IHC/FO treatment. For GC–MS analysis, samples were extracted using CHCl3 into neutral, basic, and acid phases and then dried using the drying agent sodium sulfite and filtered using 0.45 μm syringe filters. The prepared samples were used for GC–MS analysis via an Agilent 7890A/5975C GC/MS analyzer equipped with a quartz capillary column with id of 0.25 mm, length of 30 m, and film thickness of 0.25 μm. The stationary phase was OV-101. Temperature for the gasification compartment was maintained at 280 °C. The temperature control program was followed by retaining at 50 °C for 1 min and then increasing to 280 °C with an increment of 15 °C min−1. The temperature for the MS ion source was 200 °C, and electron energy was 70 eV.
GC–MS was further used to identify the composition of coking wastewater before and after IHC or IHC/FO treatment. For GC–MS analysis, samples were extracted using CHCl3 into neutral, basic, and acid phases and then dried using the drying agent sodium sulfite and filtered using 0.45 μm syringe filters. The prepared samples were used for GC–MS analysis via an Agilent 7890A/5975C GC/MS analyzer equipped with a quartz capillary column with id of 0.25 mm, length of 30 m, and film thickness of 0.25 μm. The stationary phase was OV-101. Temperature for the gasification compartment was maintained at 280 °C. The temperature control program was followed by retaining at 50 °C for 1 min and then increasing to 280 °C with an increment of 15 °C min−1. The temperature for the MS ion source was 200 °C, and electron energy was 70 eV.
4
Leaf and Silique Biomass and Chlorophyll Analysis
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Six leaves and twelve siliques per treatment were used to determine areas according to the aforementioned approach. Leaves and silique walls were oven dried to constant weight at 60 °C, and dry mass per area (MA) was calculated by dividing the weight of the dry matter by the area. The samples were then milled, and subsamples of 0.15 g were digested with H2SO4-H2O2 [48 (link)], before K concentration determination using a flame 321 photometer (M-410, Cole-Parmer, Chicago, IL, USA). Thereafter, another three leaves and six siliques (with seeds and septa removed) were cut into small segments (approximately 5 mm). After extraction with 80% (v/v) alcohol for 24 h, chlorophyll concentration was determined using a UV–vis spectrophotometer (UV2102, Unico, China) after extracting with 80% (v/v) alcohol for 24 h [49 (link)].
5
Measuring Chlorophyll and Photosynthesis in Wheat Leaves
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
To determine chlorophyll content, leaf tissues were harvested using a circular punch that yields 0.5-cm diameter leaf discs. There were four flag leaf replicates for each treatment. Chlorophyll was extracted from wheat flag leaves obtained from the field at EZhou using 95% (v/v) ethanol (analytically pure, Sinopharm Chemical Reagent Co., Ltd) and the extracted chlorophyll concentration was determined using a spectrophotometer (UV2102, Unico, Shanghai, China) [25 (link)].
For the photosynthetic rate, flag leaf samples were obtained from the field at EZhou. Each treatment had three flag leaf replicates. Photosynthetic rate determination was performed as previously described [26 (link)].
For the photosynthetic rate, flag leaf samples were obtained from the field at EZhou. Each treatment had three flag leaf replicates. Photosynthetic rate determination was performed as previously described [26 (link)].
6
Purification and Characterization of Natural Compounds
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
All 1H and 13C-NMR data were measured on a Bruker 600 spectrometer operating at 600 (1H) and 150 (13C) MHz. HR-ESI-MS were obtained using a UPLC-Q-TOF-MS/MS (Waters Synapt G2, United States). Optical rotations were measured on a 241 polarimeter (PerkinElmer, Waltham, United States). CD spectra were recorded with a JASCO J-815 spectropolarimeter. UV-2102 (Unico, Shanghai, China) was used to measure UV data. IR data were acquired using an FTIR-8400S spectrophotometer (Shimadzu, Kyoto, Japan). Semi-preparative HPLC separation was performed on a Shimadzu LC-6 AD instrument packed with a YMC-Pack ODS-A column (5 μm, 250 × 10 mm). Sephadex LH-20 (Pharmacia Biotech, Sweden) and silica gel (60–100, 100–200 mesh; Qingdao Marine Chemical Factory, Qingdao, China) were used for column chromatography.
7
Electrochemical Characterization of AP
8
Maize Gas Exchange and Chlorophyll Analysis
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Gas exchange parameters such as the net photosynthetic rate (Pn), stomatal conductance (Gs), intercellular CO2 (Ci), and transpiration rate (Tr) were measured in both years between 10:00 and 12:00 h, by using a LI-6400 portable photosynthesis system (LI-COR Inc., Lincoln, NE, USA) during three (V3) and fifth leaf (V5) stage of both maize varieties. Chlorophyll (Chl) contents were quantified by using the method75 (link). Chlorophyll contents were extracted from 0.1 g leaf discs with 8 mL acetone (80%) and kept in dark conditions for 24 h. The absorbance of the supernatant was measured at 646 and 663 nm using spectrophotometer (UV2102; Unico, Shanghai, China).
9
Leaf Chlorophyll and Nitrogen Analysis
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Leaf samples were taken to the lab on ice. After photo scanning, each sample leaf was cut in to small sections and then separated into two parts for chlorophyll and leaf N content measurement. The fresh samples were weighed with an electronic balance (CP2102, Ohaus Corporation). Absolute chlorophyll concentration measurements were conducted using a spectrophotometer (UV2102, Unico, China) and 95% (v/v) alcohol extracts of leaf tissue. The samples for leaf N measurement were oven-dried at 80 °C to constant weight and digested by using the micro-Kjeldahl method, after which the N concentration was measured with a discrete wet chemistry analyzer (SmartChem® 200, AMS-Westco, Italy). The leaf area was measured with Image J software (the National Institutes of Health).
10
Quantitative Leaf Trait Measurements
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
For the chlorophyll content, leaf tissues were harvested using a circular punch that yields 0.5 cm-diameter leaf discs. Then, chlorophyll was extracted from the leaf discs using 95% (v/v) ethanol (analytically pure, Sinopharm Chemical Reagent Co., Ltd), and the extracted chlorophyll concentration was measured using a spectrophotometer (UV2102, Unico, Shanghai, China)23 (link). For measurements of leaf N content, following photo-scanning, leaves were oven dried at 80 °C to a constant weight. The dried samples were digested with by the micro-Kjeldahl method, and then the N concentrations were measured using a discrete wet chemistry analyser (SmartChem® 200, AMS-Westco, Rome, Italy). The leaf area was determined using Image-J software (Wayne Rasband/NIH, Bethesda, MD, USA), and the leaf mass per area (LMA) was calculated as the ratio of leaf dry mass to leaf area.
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!