The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

Alemo 2390 5

Manufactured by IITC Life Science
Sourced in United States

The Alemo 2390-5 is a laboratory equipment designed for general laboratory applications. It features a compact and robust design. The core function of this product is to provide a reliable and consistent performance for various laboratory tasks.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

Lab products found in correlation

9 protocols using alemo 2390 5

1

Mechanical and Cold Hypersensitivity Assessment

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Paw withdrawal thresholds (g) to mechanical stimulation were measured in duplicate in each paw using an electronic von Frey anesthesiometer (IITC model Alemo 2390–5, Woodland Hills, CA) as described previously(31 (link)). Duration of hypersensitivity to cold stimulation was measured using the acetone method in the same animals used to assess mechanical hypersensitivity (32 (link)).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Mechanical Paw Withdrawal Threshold Assessment

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Paw withdrawal thresholds (in grams) to mechanical stimulation were measured using an electronic von Frey anesthesiometer (IITC model Alemo 2390–5, Woodland Hills, CA) as described previously [30 (link),36 (link)]. Mice were placed on an elevated metal mesh table where they were habituated under individual, inverted plastic cages for at least 20 minutes prior to testing. Following the cessation of exploratory behaviors, a force was applied to the midplantar region of the hind paw with a semi-flexible tip connected to the anesthesiometer. Mechanical stimulation was terminated when the mouse withdrew its paw from the mesh surface. The threshold for paw withdrawal was determined in duplicate in each paw; responsiveness in each paw was averaged into a single determination for each animal.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Mechanical Paw Withdrawal Threshold Assay

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Paw withdrawal thresholds to mechanical stimulation were evaluated as previously described (Slivicki et al., 2016 , Slivicki et al., 2018 ). In brief, animals were habituated for at least 20 min on a wire mesh table under an inverted plastic container. Following the habituation period, an electronic von Frey anesthesiometer (IITC model Alemo 2390–5, Woodland Hills, CA) with a semi-flexible tip attached was used to stimulate the plantar surface of the hindpaw. The amount of force in grams (g) to elicit a withdrawal response (i.e. lifting of the paw) was then recorded. Measurements for each paw were performed in duplicate with at least a 7 min interval in between stimulations. These 4 values were averaged for each subject and used for data analysis.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Assessing Mechanical Allodynia and Heat Sensitivity

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Mechanical allodynia was evaluated using an electronic von Frey anesthesiometer (IITC Life Science, model Alemo 2390–5, Woodland Hills, CA) as described previously [22 (link),36 (link),86 ,87 ]. In brief, animals were habituated to 10 cm x 10 cm acrylic holding containers placed on an elevated mesh platform 1 h prior to testing. Black dividers prevented mice from seeing other mice being tested simultaneously. Pressure was applied to the plantar surface of the hindpaw using the anesthesiometer, and the maximum force applied before the animal withdrew its paw was recorded. Each paw was stimulated twice with at least 7 min between stimulations. The two withdrawal thresholds were averaged for each data point.
Responsivity to heat stimulation was measured using a thermal plantar test apparatus (IITC Life Science, model 390) as described previously [6 ]. In brief, animals were habituated on a glass surface heated to 30°C in the same acrylic containers with black dividers as used for mechanical allodynia. A focused beam of light was applied to the hindpaw, and the latency for the animal to withdraw its paw was recorded. Each hindpaw of the animal was tested 2–3 times with at least 5 min between each measurement. A cutoff latency of 20 s per stimulation was applied to avoid tissue damage. The withdrawal latencies for all stimulations on a single paw were averaged for each data point.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Paw Withdrawal Threshold Measurement

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Assessment of paw withdrawal thresholds to mechanical stimulation was performed using an electronic von Frey anesthesiometer (IITC model Alemo 2390–5, Woodland Hills, CA) as described in our previously published work44 (link)–46 (link). This method permits assessment of paw withdrawal thresholds from mechanical stimulation in animals that are not manually restrained. Mice were placed on an elevated mesh table and confined to clear Plexiglas observation chambers. Following at least 20 minutes of habituation to the test chamber, paw withdrawal thresholds were assessed by applying the mechanical stimulator to the midplantar region of the hind paw with a semiflexible tip attached to the anesthesiometer. Stimulation was terminated once the animal withdrew its paw from the stimulus. Paw withdrawal thresholds were measured in duplicate and are reported as the mean of duplicate measurements for each paw averaged across subjects.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Quantifying Mechanical Paw Withdrawal Thresholds

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Paw withdrawal thresholds to mechanical stimulation were measured using an electronic von Frey anesthesiometer (IITC model Alemo 2390–5, Woodland Hills, CA) as described previously.24 (link) Mice were placed on an elevated metal mesh table where they were habituated under individual, inverted plastic cages for at least 20 min until exploratory behavior had ceased. After the habituation period, a force was applied to the midplantar region of the hind paw with a semiflexible tip connected to the anesthesiometer. Mechanical stimulation was terminated when the animal withdrew its paw and the value of the applied force was recorded in grams. Mechanical paw withdrawal thresholds were obtained twice for each paw, and are reported as the mean of two duplicate determinations obtained from each animal, averaged across subjects. Mechanical thresholds were taken at 5, 30, 60, and 120 min post-capsaicin injection. AM251 (3 mg/kg), AMG9810 (3 mg/kg), or vehicle were administered 30 min prior to i.pl. capsaicin or vehicle injection.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Mechanical Paw Withdrawal Threshold Assay

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Paw withdrawal thresholds to mechanical stimulation were measured using an electronic von Frey anesthesiometer (IITC model Alemo 2390–5, Woodland Hills, CA) as described in our previously published work [16 (link)]. Mice were placed on an elevated metal mesh table and were allowed to habituate under individual, inverted plastic cages to the testing platform for at least 20 minutes until exploratory behavior had ceased. After the habituation period, a force was applied to the midplantar region of the hind paw with a semiflexible tip connected to the anesthesiometer. Mechanical stimulation was terminated when the animal withdrew its paw and the value of the applied force was recorded in grams. Mechanical paw withdrawal thresholds were obtained in duplicate for each paw, and are reported as the mean of duplicate determinations obtained from each animal.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Automated Paw Withdrawal Threshold Measurement

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Paw withdrawal thresholds to mechanical stimulation were measured in grams (g) using an electronic von Frey anesthesiometer (IITC model Alemo 2390–5, Woodland Hills, CA, United States) as described previously (Slivicki et al., 2016 (link)). Mice were placed on an elevated metal mesh table where they were habituated under individual, inverted plastic cages for at least 30 min prior to testing. Following the cessation of exploratory behaviors, a force was applied to the midplantar region of the hind paw with a semiflexible tip connected to the anesthesiometer. Mechanical stimulation was terminated when the mouse withdrew its paw from the mesh surface. The threshold for paw withdrawal was determined in duplicate in each paw; responsiveness in each paw was subsequently averaged into a single determination for each animal.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Mechanical Paw Withdrawal Threshold Measurement

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Paw withdrawal thresholds in response to mechanical stimulation were measured in grams (g) using an electronic von Frey anesthesiometer (IITC model Alemo 2390–5, Woodland Hills, CA) as described in our previous work (Li et al., 2019 (link); Slivicki et al., 2020 ; Slivicki et al., 2018 (link)). Mice were allowed to habituate under individual, inverted plastic cages on a mesh table for at least 30 min prior to testing. Following the cessation of exploratory behaviors, a force was applied to the midplantar region of the hind paw with a semiflexible tip connected to the anesthesiometer. Mechanical stimulation was removed when the mouse withdrew its paw from contact with the mechanical stimulator, and the value of the applied force was recorded in grams. Mechanical paw withdrawal thresholds were obtained in duplicate for each paw and are reported as the mean of duplicate determinations from each animal, averaged across animals, for each group.
+ 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!