The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

15 protocols using al oh 3

1

Synthesis of Chernobyl LFCM Simulants

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The preparation, synthesis and bulk characterization of simulant Chernobyl Brown and Black LFCM materials was performed as follows. The batched compositions were based on an average of all of the analysed real LFCM samples available in the literature [see Barlow et al. (2020 ▸ ) for a summary and for the final batch compositions]. Stoichiometric amounts of the precursors including SiO2 (Lochaline Quartz Sand, 99.6%), CaCO3 (Fisher, 98%), ZrO2 (Aldrich, 99%), Na2CO3 (Alfa Aesar, 98%), BaCO3 (Alfa Aesar, 99%), Al(OH)3 (Acros, 95%), Mn2O3 (Aldrich, 99%), stainless steel 316 (Fe/Cr18/Ni10/Mo3, Goodfellow), Mg(OH)2 (Sigma-Aldrich, 99.9%) and UO2 (BDH) were mixed and then heated in alumina crucibles under a reducing atmosphere (5% H2 in 95% N2) at 1500°C for 4 h, followed by a second dwell at 720°C for 72 h to encourage crystallite growth. Bulk characterization was conducted by powder X-ray diffraction (XRD) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM), demonstrating that the microstructures and phase assemblages of the simulant samples were similar to those found in real Brown and Black LFCMs (Barlow et al., 2017 ▸ , 2020 ▸ ).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Lubricant Characterization by Spectroscopy

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Two grades of commercial lubricants (C2 and C3) from two different suppliers (SA and SB) were provided from Sogefi group, Al(OH)3 was purchased from Acros Organics, Ludox SM-30 and KOH were purchased from Sigma Aldrich, dd H2O: double distilled water.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Ovalbumin-Induced Allergic Asthma Model

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Mice were sensitized and challenged to OVAlbumin (OVA; Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) as previously described with modifications (24 (link)). On days 1 and 14, 20 μg of OVA mixed with 2 mg of Al(OH)3 (Thermo Fischer Scientific, Waltham, MA) in 0.2 ml saline and was administered intraperitoneally (OVA sensitization). Non-sensitized animals received normal saline injections. On days 21 through 24, mice were challenged with nebulized 1% OVA in saline or saline alone (OVA and saline challenged groups, respectively) for 20 minutes. Animals were administered PMX205 subcutaneously (50μg/100μl/mouse) or vehicle control (100μl/mouse) at 1 and 24 hours prior to OVA or saline sensitization and challenge (Figure 1). Separate dose and frequency studies with PMX205 were conducted to optimize experimental protocol (data not shown).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

OVA-Induced Allergic Airway Model

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
C57BL/6J mice (JAX:000664) were sensitized and challenged to OVA as previously described with modifications (24 (link)). For sensitization, 20μg OVA was mixed with 2 mg of Al (OH)3 (Thermo Fisher Inc., Waltham, MA) in 0.2 ml saline and administered intraperitoneally. Non-sensitized animals received saline only. Mice were implanted with the tumor cells in the pancreas on days as mentioned in figure legend. Mice were challenged with nebulized 1.5% OVA in saline or saline alone (saline challenged groups), for 20 minutes twice a week until the end of the study. Allergic phenotype was validated by IgE quantitation in the serum using ELISA kit (cat no: 501128838, eBioscience Inc, CA, USA) as per the manufacturer’s protocol. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) was collected from the airways and differential counting for eosinophil was performed on cytospin-prepared slides using DiffQuick (Siemens Healthineer Inc., Neward, DE) as previously described (24 (link)).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Raccoon Dog RDPV Vaccine Evaluation

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Twenty-five raccoon dogs were divided into 5 groups (n = 5), and were immunized by intramuscular injection. Groups A, B, C used 10 μg, 50 μg, and 100 μg RDPV VLP treated with 20 mg/ml Al(OH)3 (Thermo, USA), respectively. In addition, group D were vaccinated with 100 μL of experimentally inactivated RDPV vaccine (HA titer 1:211). Group E was vaccinated with 100 μL PBS. Blood sample was obtained from the veins of the forelimb at 14, 28, 42, 56, 70, 84, 98 days post-inoculation (dpi). The blood samples were centrifuged at 4000 rpm/min for 15 min. The extracted serum was inactivated at 56 °C for 30 min. RDPV RPSN virus was used as antigen (HA titer 1:24). The mixtures were incubated with 1.0% pig erythrocytes in a 96-well V-shaped microplates for Hemagglutination inhibition. The raccoon dogs immunized for 14 days were euthanized, the injection site was observed grossly, and evaluation of the cadavers was done to assess the safety of this vaccine.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Ear Cutaneous Reaction Induction Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Ear cutaneous reaction was induced by repeated applications of 2,4-dinitrochlorobenzene (DNCB; Sigma, St. Louis, MO, USA) after systemic sensitization, as previously described [24 (link)]. Briefly, animals were sensitized at day 0, with an intramuscular injection of 1 mg of dinitrophenyl-bovine serum albumin (DNP-BSA) precipitated in 7.8 mg of aluminum hydroxide gel (Al(OH)3; Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) in 1 mL of saline solution. Simultaneously, and as an adjuvant, 0.5 mL of Bordetella pertussis vaccine (Zuvirac, Mexico City, Mexico) containing 10–15 × 109 heat-killed bacilli/mL was injected subcutaneously. On days 14, 16, 18, 20, 22, and 36, animals were resensitized with a topical application of 60 µL of 1.5% w/v DNCB prepared in acetone-olive oil (A-OO) solution (4 : 1) to both sides of the right ear lobe of the rats. Control group was only injected with adjuvants and topically applied with A-OO solution (Figure 1).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Cytokine Profiling in Allergic Inflammation

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Grade III and V OVA were purchased from Sigma (MO, United States); Al (OH)3 was acquired from Thermo Scientific Company. IgE, IL-2, IL-5, IL-13, IL-17A, and IL-10, were detected using ELISA kits. The ELISA kits were purchased from NeoBioscien Company, and the experimental steps were strictly in accordance with the kit instructions.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Allergen Extract Sensitization Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
HDM extract was obtained from the Greer laboratories. The allergens were extracted from whole body crust of Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, which contained 100 EU endotoxin/mg. E. coli 0111:B4 LPS was obtained from Sigma. Low endotoxin OVA (endotoxin level <1 EU/mg) was from Chondrex, Inc. Alum, which contained 40 mg/ml Al(OH)3, was from Thermo-Fisher. Anti-mouse antibodies used for flow cytometry were CD11c (clone N418, eBioscience), I-A/I-E (Clone M5/114.152, Biolegend), CD11b (clone M1/70, BD), CD103 (clone M290, BD), CD64 (clone X54-5/7.1, BD), CD86 (clone GC1, BD), CD40 (clone 3/23, BD), CD45 (clone 30-F11, Biolegend), CD3 (clone 17A2, BD), B220 (clone RA3-6B2, eBioscience), NK1.1 (clone PK136, BD), GATA3 (clone L50-823, BD), and CD326 (clone G8.8, Biolegend). ELISA kits IL-4, IL-5, IL-10, IFN-γ, and MCP-1 were from BD; IL-13, KC, CCL20, GM-CSF, and IL-17 kits were from R&D Systems.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Ovalbumin-Induced Allergic Airway Inflammation

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The mice were intraperitoneally (i.p.) immunized with 20 μg (in 100 μL) of chicken OVAlbumin (OVA) (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO, USA) emulsified in alum [2.25 mg of Al(OH)3/2 mg Mg(OH)2] (Thermo Fisher Scientific, Waltham, MA, USA) on days 0 and 14 (OVA/Alum model group). On days 24, 25, and 26, the OVA/Alum mice were challenged with an aerosol of 1% OVA in saline for 40 min via ultrasonic nebulization (DeVilbiss, Somerset, PA, USA). The mice in the OVA/Alum-ABT-199 or OVA/Alum-Nf-ABT-199 groups were intratracheally (i.t.) administered different doses of ABT-199 (Selleck, Houston, TX, USA) or Nf-ABT-199 in 50 mL of vehicle 2 h after each OVA challenge. ABT-199 was formulated in 60% phosal 50 propylene glycol, 30% polyethylene glycol 400, and 10% ethanol [24 (link),25 ]. The naive mice were sensitized and challenged with saline alone at the same time. After the last allergen challenge for 24 h, all mice were sacrificed for analysis. Bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) fluid and lungs were collected. The OVA/Alum model was established using the eosinophilic airway inflammatory model, as previously reported [26 (link)].
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Ovalbumin Immunization Protocol in Mice

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Eight- to 10-week-old C57BL/6 or C3H/HeN mice were immunized i.p. with PBS alone, OVAlbumin (100 μg/mouse, Sigma‐Aldrich) in PBS, OVA (100 μg/mouse) plus Al(OH)3 (80 mg/kg, Thermo Fisher Scientific), OVA (100 μg/mouse) plus CCL-34 (4 mg/kg), or OVA (100 μg/mice) plus vehicle (10% DMSO) in a volume of 100 μl. The method and dose of OVA immunization were chosen according to a previous publication66 (link)–68 (link). For the short-term immunization, the mice were sacrificed 24 hours after injection. For the long-term immunization, the mice were injected with the above-indicated drugs on day 0, day 7 and day 14, and sacrificed on day 21. For the combined treatment with autophagy inhibitor, 3-MA (20 mg/kg) was administered intraperitoneally 30 minutes before immunization as previously described69 (link). The i.p. injections were carried out in awake mice without anaesthesia procedure.
+ 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!