The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

Sem feg xl 30 microscope

Manufactured by Philips
Sourced in Netherlands, United States

The SEM-FEG XL-30 microscope is a scanning electron microscope (SEM) with a field emission gun (FEG) electron source. It provides high-resolution imaging and analysis of samples at the nanoscale level.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

11 protocols using sem feg xl 30 microscope

1

Ultrastructural Analysis of Biological Samples

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Samples were collected and were fixed at 4 °C for 2 h in 2% glutaraldehyde in 0.1 M Na-cacodylate buffer (pH 7.2). Specimens washed in 0.1 M Na-cacodylate buffer (pH 7.2), were post-fixed at 4 °C with 1% osmic acid in cacodylate buffer (pH 7.2) for 2 h. After standard dehydration in ethanol series, samples were embedded in an Epon-Araldite 812 mixture and sectioned with a Reichert Ultracut S ultratome (Leica, Nussloch, Germany). Semithin sections were stained by conventional methods (crystal violet, methylene blue, May-Grünwald Giemsa and Toluidine blue stainings) and were observed with a light microscope (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan). Images were acquired with a Nikon DS-SM camera. For TEM, thin sections were stained by uranyl acetate and lead citrate and observed with a Jeol 1010 electron microscope (Jeol, Tokyo, Japan). Data were recorded with a MORADA digital camera system (Olympus).
For SEM, the dehydrated samples were treated with hexamethyldisilazane and mounted on polylysinated slides. The samples were air-dried and covered with a 9 nm gold film by flash evaporation of carbon and gold in an Emitech K250 sputter coater (Emitech, Baltimore, Md, USA). The specimens were examined with a SEM-FEG Philips XL-30 microscope (Philips, Eindhven, Netherlands).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Ultrastructural Analysis of Cells

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Cells encapsulated in PTFE were collected for transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). TEM analysis samples were fixed for 2 hours in 0.1 M cacodylate buffer pH 7.2, containing 2% glutaraldehyde. Specimens were then washed in the same buffer and post-fixed for 2 hours with 1% osmic acid in cacodylate buffer. After standard serial ethanol dehydration, specimens were embedded in an Epon-Araldite 812 mixture. Sections were obtained with a Reichert Ultracut S ultratome (Leica). Semi-thin sections were stained by conventional methods (crystal violet and basic fuchsin) and observed under a light microscope (Olympus). Thin sections were stained by uranyl acetate and lead citrate and observed with a Jeol 1010 EX electron microscope (Jeol).
For SEM, cells were fixed and dehydrated as described above, then treated with hexamethildisilazane and mounted on polylysinated slides, air dried and subsequently covered with a 9 nm gold film by flash evaporation of carbon in an Emitech K 250 sputter coater (Emitech). Specimens were examined with a SEM-FEG Philips XL-30 microscope (Philips).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Scanning Electron Microscopy Sample Preparation

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Samples were washed in PBS and fixed for 1 h in Karnovsky fixative (2% paraformaldehyde and 2.5% glutaraldehyde in 0.1 M cacodylate buffer (pH 7.2)), washed in 0.1 M cacodylate buffer (pH 7.2) and subsequently postfixed for 2 h in 1% osmium tetroxide and potassium ferrocyanide in 0.1 M cacodylate buffer (pH 7.2). After a series of washes with PBS (pH 7.2), the samples were immersed for 1 h in osmium tetroxide (0.1% in PBS). After being dehydrated in an increasing series of ethanol (70%, 90%, and 100%), the samples were dried with hexamethyldisilazane at the critical point. Once mounted on stubs, the samples were coated in gold with a Sputter K250 (Emitech, Baltimore, MD, USA) and subsequently observed with a SEM-FEG XL-30 microscope (Philips, Eindhoven, The Netherlands).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Ultrastructural Analysis of Biological Samples

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Samples were collected and fixed with 4% glutaraldehyde in 0.1 M cacodylate buffer (pH 7.4) for 2–4 h at room temperature and then washed for 10 min, three times in the same buffer.
For TEM analyses, specimens were post fixed for 1 h in 1% osmic acid in cacodylate buffer. After dehydration in an ethanol series, samples were embedded in an Epon–Araldite 812 mixture and sectioned with a Reichert Ultracut S ultratome (Leica, Nussloch, Germany). Semithin sections (70 μm) were stained by crystal violet and basic fuchsin and then observed with a light microscope (Eclipse Nikon, Amsterdam, Netherlands); images were acquired with a Nikon DS-SM camera. Thin sections (70 nm) were stained by uranyl acetate and lead citrate and observed with a Jeol 1010 electron microscope (Jeol, Tokyo, Japan).
For SEM analysis, specimens were post-fixed for different times in a solution of 1% osmium tetroxide and 1.25% potassium ferrous-cyanide and dehydrated in an ethanol series and two times in hexamethyldisilazane. The samples were mounted on carbonated stubs and gold coated in an Emitech K250 sputter coater (Emitech, Baltimore, MD, USA) and observed with a SEM-FEG XL-30 microscope (Philips, Eindhoven, The Netherlands).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Structural Alterations in Plastic Particles After Rearing Black Soldier Fly Larvae

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
After rearing BSF larvae on PEd and PSd for 2 weeks, the substrates were collected to evaluate any structural alterations on the surface of the plastic particles (post-rearing samples). PEd and PSd kept in the same conditions without the larvae served as controls. All diet samples were stored at − 20 °C until use. Moreover, nonagarized PS and PE particles (i.e., plastic powders) were analyzed, too. After thawing, samples were placed in cell strainers (40-μm mesh size) (BD Biosciences, Milan, Italy) and extensively washed with 100 mM NaCl and Milli-Q water. Samples were then mounted on stubs, gold-coated with a Sputter K250 coater, and finally analyzed with a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM)-FEG XL-30 microscope (Philips, Eindhoven, The Netherlands) (Centro Grandi Attrezzature, University of Insubria). For each condition, the analysis was performed in triplicate.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Electron Microscopy Sample Preparation

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
After incubation with 53D1 or Chi18H8, PM was fixed with 4% (v/v) glutaraldehyde in 0.1 M sodium cacodylate buffer pH 7.4, overnight at 4°C. After post-fixation with 1% (w/v) osmium tetroxide and 1.25% (w/v) potassium ferrocyanide for 1 h, samples were dehydrated in an ethanol series and then incubated in hexamethyldisilazane (two steps of 10 min each). Samples were mounted on stubs, carbon coated with a Sputter K250 coater, and finally observed with a SEM-FEG XL-30 microscope (Philips, Eindhoven, Netherlands).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

3D Imaging and Elemental Analysis of MWCNT-Exposed Leeches

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
To obtain three-dimensional imaging by SEM, tissues from leeches untreated or exposed to MWCNTs were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde for 1 h at room temperature. The specimens, washed in PBS (pH 7.2), were dehydrated in an increasing series of ethanol, cleared in in xylene for 30 minutes and then penetrated with paraffin (melting point, 58–60°C, Bioptica, Milan, Italy), at 60°C over night. Paraffin sections (7 μm) were deparaffinized with xylene and dehydrated in an increasing series of ethanol. Slides were mounted on stubs, sputter coated with a thin layer of gold and then observed with a SEM-FEG XL-30 microscope (Philips, Eindhoven, The Netherlands).
To confirm the presence of aluminum, iron and cobalt associated to the crude MWCNTs powder and evaluate their entrance in leech tissues, samples were observed in backscattered electron mode with a scanning electron microscope coupled with an energy dispersive X-ray analyzer (EDAX Genesis 2000). Samples were stuck onto slide holders and sputter coated with a thin layer of gold. Photographic maps of element distribution obtained on the image frames were processed by Image Analysis (1994) (Soft-Image Software GmbH). These maps were then superimposed to each source image with Adobe Photoshop (Adobe Systems).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

SEM Imaging of Winged and Wingless Aphids

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Adult aphids (6 in the wingless morph and 2 in the winged morph) were prepared as described by Sun et al. (2013) (link). Briefly, they were fixed in 70% ethanol for 2 h and cleaned in an ultrasonic bath for 1 min in the same solution. Finally, samples were dehydrated in 100% ethanol for 30 min, air-dried, coated in gold by K250 sputter coater (Emitech, Ashford, Kent, United Kingdom) and examined with SEM-FEG XL-30 microscope (Philips, Eindhoven, The Netherlands).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Fixation and Imaging of E. coli Cells

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Reaching an OD600 of 0.6, E. coli bacteria were incubated as previously described. After treatments, cells were centrifuged for 10 min at 13,000 rpm, and bacterial pellets were fixed with Karnovsky fixative (2% paraformaldehyde and 2.5% glutaraldehyde in 0.1 M cacodylate Buffer, pH 7.2) for 30 min at 4 °C. Samples were washed in 0.1 M cacodylate buffer (pH 7.2) and post-fixed in a solution of 1% osmium tetroxide and potassium ferrocyanide for 1 h. After several washings in PBS (pH 7.2) and dehydration with an increasing scale of ethanol, 20 µL of bacterial pellet resuspended in 100% ethanol were dried onto glass slides and finally subjected to critical point drying with hexamethyldisilazane. Images were acquired using SEM-FEG XL-30 microscope (Philips, Eindhoven, The Netherlands).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Structural Alterations in Plastic Particles After Rearing Black Soldier Fly Larvae

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
After rearing BSF larvae on PEd and PSd for 2 weeks, the substrates were collected to evaluate any structural alterations on the surface of the plastic particles (post-rearing samples). PEd and PSd kept in the same conditions without the larvae served as controls. All diet samples were stored at − 20 °C until use. Moreover, nonagarized PS and PE particles (i.e., plastic powders) were analyzed, too. After thawing, samples were placed in cell strainers (40-μm mesh size) (BD Biosciences, Milan, Italy) and extensively washed with 100 mM NaCl and Milli-Q water. Samples were then mounted on stubs, gold-coated with a Sputter K250 coater, and finally analyzed with a Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM)-FEG XL-30 microscope (Philips, Eindhoven, The Netherlands) (Centro Grandi Attrezzature, University of Insubria). For each condition, the analysis was performed in triplicate.
+ 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!