The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

8 protocols using gal 1

1

Immunoblotting Analysis of Cellular Proteins

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Immunoblotting was done as described previously(23 (link)). Antibodies used in immunoblotting were Gal-1 (Abcam), AR (Abcam), E-cadherin, phospho AKT, AKT, beta-actin (Cell Signaling) and Ras (chemicon). Immunoblotting bands were quantified by Image J software.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Immunohistochemical Analysis of Protein Expression

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Tissue microarray (TMA) sections were de-waxed using xylene twice and rehydrated with 100% ethanol for 5 minutes, 95% and 80% ethanol for 5 minute each. Then rinse in PBS. Antigen retrival was performed in 10 mM, pH 6.0 sodium citrate buffer at 95-100°C for 20 mins. After cooling down to room temperature, tissue sections were rinsed with PBS once followed by blocking endogenous peroxidase with 1% H2O2 and blocking non-specific binding site with Power Block (BioGenex) for 5 min at room temperature each. The tissue sections were then incubated with the specific antibody against Gal-1 (Abcam) or AR-V7 (GeneTex) or E-Cad (Cell signaling) or ki-67 (Cell signaling) overnight, followed by rinsing with PBS and incubation by an biotin-conjugated goat anti-rabbit IgG (BioGenex), as the second antibody. TMA sections were then incubated with strepavidin conjugated-HRP (BioGenex) for 20 mins at room temperature. HRP activity was detected using diaminobenzidine tetrahydrochloride (DAB) as substrate (BioGenex). Nuclei were counterstained with hematoxylin (Cell signaling). The ki-67 positive cells were counted in 3 random chosen areas.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Western Blot Analysis of Metastatic RCC

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Dysregulated protein expression in metastatic RCC samples was verified by western blot (WB) analysis. Briefly, 30 μg of total protein were electrophoretically separated on a SDS–PAGE gel. Proteins were transferred to a nitrocellulose membrane and probed with primary antibodies overnight at 4 °C. Primary antibodies were used for Gal-1 (Abcam, Cambridge, MA, USA), HIF-1α (Novus Biologicals, Littleton, CO, USA), phospho-mTOR S2448 (serine 2448), total mTOR, phospho-Akt S473 (serine 473), total Akt and α-tubulin (Cell Signaling Technology, Danvers, MA, USA) was used as a loading control. The following day, membranes were washed with tris-buffered saline and Tween-20 and incubated with a secondary anti-rabbit antibody conjugated with horseradish peroxidase. Finally, membranes were incubated with enhanced chemoluminescence reagent (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, Piscataway, NJ, USA) and protein expression was visualised after exposure to X-ray film. Each experiment was performed in triplicate and representative blots are shown. Densitometry analysis was performed using Image J software from the National Institutes of Health (http://rsbweb.nih.gov/ij/) and differences were evaluated using the Student's t-test.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Histological Analysis of Mouse Tumors

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Tissues were fixed in 10% formalin for 16 h and kept in 70% ethanol for 72 h, followed by embedding in paraffin and cutting into 5-μm sections. Hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining was performed22 (link). Mouse tumor score was quantified by pathologists based on H&E stained slides using five criteria (i.e., the level of centrilobular vacuolar degeneration, the number of proliferation foci, scirrhous type foci of proliferation mitotic index, and inflammatory cells)23 (link),24 (link). Details are described in Supporting Information Table S1.
Immunostaining was performed with specific antibodies against Gal1 (Abcam, Cambridge, MA, USA) and CD8 (eBioscience, Waltham, MA). The number of positive-staining cells was counted in at least five random microscopic fields (100 × magnification) for each section.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Immunohistochemical Staining of Gal-1, VEGF, and CD34

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The primary antibodies used in this study were ready-to-use monoclonal mouse Gal-1 (Abcam, Cambridge, UK), anti-VEGF (Diagnostic Biosystems, Pleasanton, CA, USA), and anti-CD34 (Diagnostic Biosystems). An UnoVue HRP/DAB Detection System (Diagnostic Biosystems) was used for primary antibody visualization.
The method employed in this study has been described in our previous work [10 (link),11 (link)]. Briefly, sections of tissue (4 to 5 µm thick) were deparaffinized and washed with distilled water. Antigen retrieval was performed using a microwave. The sections were then allowed to cool and endogenous peroxidase blocking was performed in 5% hydrogen peroxide. Blocking of nonspecific antibody binding was carried out in 5% casein. Sections were washed and incubated in a moist chamber at room temperature with corresponding primary antibodies followed by incubation with anti-mouse horseradish peroxidase secondary antibodies. The reaction product was visualized after 3,3-diaminobenzidine (DAB) staining for 5 minutes followed by Mayer’s hematoxylin counterstaining [10 (link),11 (link)].
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Western Blot Analysis of Protein Markers

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Protein was collected and diluted with a loading buffer. Sodium dodecyl sulfate polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) was used to separate protein and then transferring was conducted. α-SMA, phosphor-AKT (p-AKT), AKT, phosphor-Erk1/2 (p-Erk1/2), Erk1/2, collagen I, fibronectin and Gal-1 antibodies were purchased from Abcam (Cambridge, MA, USA). Glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GADPH) antibody was obtained from Proteintech (Rosemont, IL, USA). The expression of each protein was visualized using an enhanced chemiluminescence system (ECL; Tanon, China).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Protein Analysis Protocol for STING Pathway

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
For protein analysis, cells were lysed in RIPA lysis buffer and processed for protein loading as previously published[9 (link)]. The following primary antibodies were used to detect specific proteins: Gal1 (Cat: ab138513, Abcam), phospho-STING (Cat: 72971), phospho-TBK1 (ser172, Cat: 5483), STING (Cat:13647), TBK1 (Cat: 3504), IRF-3 (Cat: 4302, RRID: AB_1904036), phospho-IRF-3 (Cat: 29047, RRID: AB_2773013), RelA/p65 (NF-κB (Cat: 8242), phospho-NF-κB (RelA/p65, Cat:3033), NF-κB1 p105/p50 (Cat: 3035), NF-κB2 p100/p52 (Cat: 4882) from Cell Signaling Technologies, and β-Actin (1:5000; Cat: sc-47778 HRP, Santa Cruz Biotechnologies). Secondary antibodies used in this study were HRP-conjugated Donkey anti-Goat IgG (H+L) (1:5000-1:10,000; Cat: A15999 Invitrogen), HRP-conjugated goat anti-rabbit (1:5000; Cat: 7074 Cell Signaling Technologies). Immunoblots were developed with Pierce West Pico (Cat: 35060; Thermo Fisher Scientific) and visualized with ChemiDoc XRS imaging system equipped with Image Lab Software (RRID: SCR_008426; Bio-Rad Laboratories). In each case, experiments were carried out in triplicate and a representative blot is shown unless otherwise stated. Blot densitometry quantification was done using ImageJ (RRID: SCR_003070)
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Differentiation of NC-like cells from ES cells

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The maintenance of ST2 cells and ES cells and differentiation of NC-like cells from ES cells were described previously (Motohashi et al., 2007) . The day when ES cells were seeded onto ST2 monolayers was defined as day 0. GAL-1 (Abcam) or rhGAL-1/Ox and CSGAL-1 (gifted from Dr. Kadoya) was also present in each experiment. Regarding GAL-1 inhibition, anti-GAL-1 (gifted from Dr. Kadoya) or control IgG (Biolegend) was used for each culture.
+ 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!