The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

26 protocols using durcupan acm resin

1

Ultrastructural Analysis of Mitochondria in POMC and AgRP Neurons

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
50 μm thick tissue slices [70 (link)] were rinsed in 1% sodium borohydride in PB for 15 min to eliminate unbound aldehydes. The primary antibodies used for labelling included a polyclonal primary POMC (Invitrogen PA5-18368, 1:1500, incubated overnight) and AgRP antibodies (Invitrogen PA5-78739, 1:200, incubated overnight). As a secondary antibody a biotinylated polyclonal goat anti-rabbit antibody was applied (Invitrogen 65–6140, 1:200, incubated for 1 hr.). Finally, ABC kits (avidin-biotin complex kits, # Pk.4001) and DAB (diaminobenzidine, CAS: 91-95-2) were used for development.
For electron microscopic analysis, sections were osmicated (1% OsO4 in PB) for 30 min, dehydrated through increasing ethanol concentrations, and embedded into Durcupan ACM resin (Sigma-Aldrich, 44610). Following embedding, ultrathin sections with a thickness of 50 nm were cut for precise examination, (see above the localization of the area in question).
The prepared sections were examined with a JEOL-1011 TEM (JEOL USA, Peabody, MA, USA). The calibrated electron micrographs were analyzed using the NIH Image J (ver. 1.52n) software. The measured parameters included the occurrence (number per area) and size of mitochondria, matrix/entire mitochondrion ratio [71 (link)].
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

3D SBF-SEM Ultrastructural Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
For 3D SBF-SEM analysis the samples were processed as described in Beike et al. (2019 (link)) based on Deerinck et al. (2010b ), in brief: After fixation (0.15 M HEPES buffer with 1.5% glutaraldehyde and 1.5% paraformaldehyde, pH 7.35) small blocks of the samples (edge length 1–2 mm) were stained en bloc applying a rOTO protocol (rOTO: reduced osmium tetroxide “thiocarbohydrazide” osmium tetroxide) with uranyl acetate and lead aspartate to obtain enough contrast and conductivity of the biological structures for SEM imaging. The samples were dehydrated in an ascending acetone series and embedded in Durcupan™ ACM resin (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, USA). To prepare the polymerized resin blocks for SBF-SEM, the embedded samples were roughly trimmed, mounted with conductive epoxy glue (Chemtronics, CircuitWorks, Kennesaw, USA) on an aluminum specimen pin (Gatan, Pleasanton, CA, USA) and precisely retrimmed with glass knives. This was followed by sputter coating of the samples with a 20 nm gold layer.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Immunogold TEM Analysis of Connexin Proteins

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Using an immunogold immunohistochemistry protocol tissues were prepared for TEM [38 (link),39 (link),40 (link)]. The fixation of the samples was carried out with 4% paraformaldehyde in PBS, after which samples were washed in PBS. Samples were cut with a vibratome (Vibratome Series 1000, Pelco 101, Ted Pella, Inc., Redding, CA, USA) into 20 µm thick sections. After washing in PBS, sections were incubated first in 50% ethanol for permeabilization and then in primary antibody for 48 h at +4 °C: rabbit anti-Cx37/GJA4 (1:100, ab181701, Abcam, Cambridge, UK); rabbit anti-Cx40/GJA5 (1:100, ab213688, Abcam, Cambridge, UK); and goat anti-Cx43/GJA1 (1:300, ab87645, Abcam, Cambridge, UK). Next, sections were rinsed in PBS after which overnight incubation followed with gold-conjugated donkey anti-rabbit or anti-goat secondary antibody (1:1000, 711-205-152 and 705-185-147, both from Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, Inc., West Grove, PA, USA). The size of the gold particles used was 12 nm for anti-rabbit and 4 nm for anti-goat antibodies. On the next day, sections were rinsed in PBS, post-fixed in 1% osmium tetroxide (1 h), and then dehydrated in ethanol and embedded in Durcupan ACM resin (Sigma-Aldrich Inc., St. Louis, Missouri, USA). The sections were observed with a transmission electron microscope (JEM JEOL 1400, Jeol Ltd., Tokyo, Japan).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Cochlear Ultrastructure Imaging via SBEM

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Contralateral cochleas were processed for serial block-face scanning electron microscopy (SBEM). In short, cochleas were fixed by perilymphatic perfusion with 2.5% glutaraldehyde in 0.1 m phosphate buffer, pH 7.4. Specimens were immersed in this fixative overnight at 4°C. The organ of Corti was microdissected from the surrounding tissue, and areas of interest were selected under differential interference contrast (DIC) optics. In the case of ototoxically lesioned adult cochleas, the medial turn was used for analysis. Selected pieces were stained with heavy metals, dehydrated, and embedded in Durcupan ACM resin (Fluka/Sigma-Aldrich).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Iron-Specific Ultrastructural Staining

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Ultrathin (60-90nm) sections of fixed cells in Embed 812 Resin (EMS, Hatfield PA) were evaluated on a Philips CM 120 STEM/MegaView III. For intracellular detail, some sections were treated with 8% uranyl acetate. For iron-specific staining we modified the procedure of Meguro et al [16 (link)] by substituting the silver-gold-uranyl nitrate post-DAB intensification with NiCl3 and introducing a permeabilization step. Specifically, after fixation, cell monolayers were permeabilized with 0.2% Triton X-100 in cacodylate buffer for 30 minutes, stained with 3% potassium ferrocyanide in 10% HCl for 10 minutes, followed by DAB/NiCl3 (Vector Labs, Burlingame, CA). After dehydration, cells were embedded in Durcupan ACM resin (Sigma-Aldrich) and etched with HF to remove the glass coverslip before ultrathin sectioning.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Ultrastructural Analysis of Mouse Hippocampal Mitochondria

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
For TEM, mouse brains were perfusion-fixed in 4% PFA and 50-μm sections were obtained by vibratome sectioning. The slices to be analysed were stored in 0.1 M PB until further processing. The slices were then transferred to polypropylene 24-well plates (Caplugs Evergreen) and processed using a PELCO BioWave Pro+ microwave (Ted Pella Inc.) and following a protocol adapted from the National Centre for Microscopy and Imaging Research protocol (Deerinck et al, 2010 (link)), which was detailed in Eder et al (2020 (link)). After processing and embedding of slices into Durcupan ACM resin (Sigma-Aldrich), the blocks were trimmed to a trapezoid around the hippocampus CA1 area. The samples were then sectioned using a UC7 ultramicrotome (Leica Microsystems), and 70-nm sections were picked up on Formvar-coated G50HEX copper grids (Gilder Grids Ltd.). The sections were viewed using a 120-kV Tecnai G2 Spirit TEM (FEI Company), and images were captured using an Orius CCD camera (Gatan Inc.). 22 control cells and 16 NDR1/2 knockout cells from respectively six and three different areas of the CA1 region were imaged at various magnifications. 16,500× images were randomised and anonymised using Advanced Renamer, for unbiased analysis of the mitochondrial morphology.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Electron Microscopy of VEEV-Infected HeLa Cells

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
HeLa cells grown on a MatTek dish (MatTek corporation, MA) were infected with VEEV TC83 (MOI = 5) for 20 h. Cells were fixed for 1 h in primary fixative (2.5% formaldehyde, 2.5% glutaraldehyde, 0.1 M sodium cacodylate, pH 7.4), washed three times in ice-cold 0.1 M sodium cacodylate buffer, and incubated with 1% osmium tetroxide in 0.1 M of sodium cacodylate for 1 h, washed three times with distilled water, stained and stabilized on ice with 2% uranyl acetate for 1 h and successively dehydrated on ice through a series of 22%, 50%, 75%, and 95% ethanols. The cells were then dehydrated three times at room temperature in 100% ethanol and infiltrated in well-mixed 50% ethanol and 50% Durcupan ACM resin (Fluka, Sigma-Aldrich) for 1 h with agitation. Cells were infiltrated twice by 100% Durcupan ACM for 3 h with agitation, after which the samples were placed in an oven and polymerized at 60°C for at least 48 h. The glass coverslip was peeled away from the bottom using a razor blade, and the selected area was cut out and glued to a block for sectioning. Thin sections (approximately 80 nm) were collected and pre-stained with 1% uranyl acetate and Sato lead before examination on a JEOL 1011 transmission electron microscope at 80 kV. Digital images were acquired using an AMT camera system.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Electron Microscopy Sample Preparation

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Samples were embedded using a protocol adapted from the NCMIR protocol (Deerinck et al., 2010 ). Briefly, after fixation, the samples were post-fixed in 2% osmium tetroxide and 1.5% potassium ferricyanide (v/v) for 1 h on ice, incubated in 1% thiocarbohydrazide in dH2O (w/v) for 20 min, followed by 2% osmium tetroxide in dH2O (w/v) for 30 min, and then washed in dH2O and incubated overnight in 1% aqueous uranyl acetate at 4°C. Cells were then stained with Walton's lead aspartate for 30 min at 60°C. The coverslips were removed from the dishes after submerging the bottom in methanol for 20 min to soften the glue. The cells were then dehydrated stepwise through an ethanol series on ice, incubated in a tin foil container in a 1:1 propylene oxide and Durcupan resin mixture, and embedded in Durcupan ACM® resin according to the manufacturer's instructions (Sigma-Aldrich).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Electron Microscopic Analysis of Cellular Ultrastructure

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Cell samples were processed for electron microscopic investigation similarly to [34 (link)]. Cells were fixed in 3% glutaraldehyde dissolved in 0.1 M cacodylate buffer (pH 7.4) containing 5% sucrose for 6 h at room temperature. After washing in 0.1 M cacodylate buffer (pH 7.4), cells were post-fixed in 1% osmium tetroxide dissolved in 0.1 M cacodylate buffer (pH 7.4) for 1 h. Then, cells were dehydrated with a graded ethanol series. Samples were embedded into DurcupanACM resin (Sigma-Aldrich). Ultrathin sections were cut with Leica Ultracut UCT Ultramicrotome, collected on Formvar-coated single-slot grids, and counterstained using uranyl acetate and Reynolds lead citrate. Sections were examined with a JEOL 1010 transmission electron microscope (JEOL Ltd., Akishima, Tokyo, Japan) and photographed with an Olympus Veleta CCD camera (Olympus, Sinjuku, Tokyo, Japan).
Morphometric assessment was accomplished using the ImageJ software. EM pictures of at least 45 different cells of each group were analyzed and cytosolic electron-dense particles were counted.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Ultrastructural Analysis of iPSCs

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
APEX2 iPSCs and their differentiated cells were fixed with glutaraldehyde (Electron Microscopy Sciences, cat. no. 16220) in sodium cacodylate buffer (Electron Microscopy Sciences, cat. no. 11653). A solution of DAB (Sigma-Aldrich, cat. no. D8001) dissolved in HCl was freshly made. After an addition of H2O2 solution (Sigma-Aldrich, cat. no. H1009), the DAB-H2O2 solution was added to cells for 5–15 minutes depending on the sample. The generation of DAB precipitates could be monitored by transmitted light microscopy. Post-fixation staining was performed with osmium tetroxide (Electron Microscopy Sciences, cat. no. 19150. The samples were then dehydrated in a graded ethanol (Sigma-Aldrich, cat. no. 459836), infiltrated in Durcupan ACM resin (Sigma-Aldrich, cat. no. 44611–44614), and polymerized in a vacuum oven.
+ 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!