The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

110 protocols using sc7620

1

Scanning Electron Microscopy of Sputtered Samples

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images were obtained using a JEOL JSM-6510 LV SEM Microscope (JEOL Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) equipped with an X-Act EDS-detector by Oxford Instruments, Abingdon, Oxfordshire, UK (an acceleration voltage of 5 kV was applied). The specimens were sputtered with an Au-Pd thin film (4–8 nm) using a mini sputter coater SC7620 from Quorum Technologies LTD (Kent, UK).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Morphological Analysis of PLA/OLA Composites

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The morphology of the PLA/OLA system subjected to different REX processes was obtained from fractures’ surfaces from impact test specimens with a field emission scanning electron microscope (FESEM) ZEISS ULTRA 55 from Oxford Instruments (Abingdon, UK). To provide electric conductivity to the polymeric samples, a sputtering process was carried out in a EMITECH sputter-coater model SC7620 from Quorum Technologies, Ltd. (East Sussex, UK). The working distance was set to 4 mm and the acceleration voltage was 2 kV.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Scanning Electron Microscopy of Bacterial Cells

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Sample preparation for scanning electron microscopy was carried out according to the method provided by Liu et al., 2021 [32 (link)] with slight modifications. The bacterial sus pensions (OD600 = 0.6) were washed three times with 0.1 mol/L phosphate buffer (pH 7.2) and resuspended. Thereafter, 4-allylbenzene-1,2-diol was added to the bacterial suspension to make the final concentrations reaching to MIC, 2 MIC and 4 MIC, respectively, and then the mixture was shaken at 180 rpm for 5 h at 28 °C. The cells were obtained after centrifugation at 5000 rpm for 5 min, and then washed three times with 0.1 mol/L PBS (pH 7.2). Subsequently, the bacterial cells were fixed to dehydrate with 2.5% glutaraldehyde at 4 °C for 12 h, and then washed 3 times with 0.1 mol/L PBS (pH 7.2), dehydrated with 30%, 50%, 70%, 80%, 90% and 100% ethanol solution for 15 min in sequence, and freeze-dried for 12 h. Finally, the samples were flattened and sprayed with gold. A SEM (Quorum Technologies, SC7620, East Sussex, UK) was used to observe the morphological change of the bacterial membrane.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Scanning Electron Microscope Imaging Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Micrographs of the prepared samples were taken by the scanning electron microscope Nova NanoSEM 450 (FEI, Hillsboro, OR, USA) equipped with a high vacuum detector and operated at 5 kV with a spot size of 2.5 A coating with a thin layer of gold/palladium was performed by a sputter coater SC 7620 (Quorum Technologies, Newhaven, East Sussex, UK).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Scanning Electron Microscopy of Microparticles

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Surface morphology, size, and shape of the MPs fabricated by formulation runs were obtained using a scanning electron microscope (JOEL JCM-5700, USA). The dried MP samples were deposited onto adhesive carbon tabs (Agar Scientific G3357N), which were pre-mounted onto aluminum stubs (Agar Scientific JEOL stubs G306). The samples were gold sputtered for 60 s to attain a thickness of approximately 30 nm (Quorum SC7620). The morphologies of the MP samples were analysed at magnifications of X100, and X500.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Nanoporous PRBM Surface Characterization

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
PRBM surfaces were coated with Au/Pd alloy (SC7620, Quorum Technologies). Images were recorded at 810× magnification by scanning electron microscopy (Phenom X Pro, FEI). Pore size distribution was determined by mercury intrusion porosimetry (Poremaster 60 GT, Quantachrome) according to ISO 15901 using a contact angle of 145 degrees and surface tension of mercury of 0.485 Nm−1.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

SEM Analysis of Z. macrostachya Microhairs

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
To observe microhair changes of Z. macrostachya between the control group and NaCl-treated group, different positions (upper, middle, and lower) of leaf tissue were collected for SEM observation. Leaves of control group and NaCl-treated group were cut into small pieces and fixed in 2.5% glutaraldehyde solution. Samples were stored in 4 °C for 24 h, glutaraldehyde solution was replaced twice during the period of storage. Samples were washed with 0.1 mol/L phosphoric acid buffer for four times, fixed with 1% osmic acid for 1.5 h, then rinsed with deionized water and dehydrated with different concentrations of ethanol (30%, 50%, 70%, 85%, 95% for 15 min for each concentration). Then samples were treated with 100% ethanol twice, 20 min each time. Moreover, the samples were soaked in isoamyl acetate for 30 min and dried at the conventional critical point (E3100, Quorum, UK) [121 (link),122 (link)]. Materials were positioned on the sample stand, and metal spraying (SC7620, Quorum, UK, 2 min) was carried out before observation. SEM was performed on Hitachi TM3030. Energy spectrum was used to examine element content (weight %) of leaf tissue.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Wood Sample Preparation for SEM

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Wood samples were cut in to 0.5 × 0.5 × 3 cm3 block. The blocks were sectioned with a sliding microtome at 120 µm thickness. Sections were dried in a hot air oven (80° C) for 48 h and then attached on a stub with a double-sided carbon tape. Samples were coated with gold particles using a sputter coater machine (SC7620; Quorum, England) and observed under a scanning electron microscope (JSM 5600 LV; JEOL, Tokyo, Japan).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

Fractography Analysis of Composite Impacts

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The morphology of the fracture surfaces of composites from the impact tests, was observed by field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM) using a ZEISS ULTRA 55 from Oxford Instruments (Abingdon, UK) microscope. Before placing the samples in the vacuum chamber, the samples were sputtered with a gold-palladium alloy in an EMITECH sputter coating model SC7620 from Quorum Technologies, Ltd. (East Sussex, UK) applying an acceleration voltage of 2 kV.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

Microstructure and Bioactivity Visualization of GelMA Hydrogel with S. boulardii

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
To detect the microstructure of GelMA hydrogel and the distribution of S. boulardii in bioactive materials, the samples were pre-cooled at −80 °C for 1 h and then freeze-dried by a freeze dryer (SCIENTZ-10N, Xinzhi, Ningbo, China) at −60 °C for 24 h. After being sprayed with conductive material by Quorum SC7620, the samples were observed using a scanning electron microscope (TescanmtraLms, Brno, Czech Republic). To improve the visualization of the pore structure, the GelMA solution was labeled with rhodamine B. After photo-crosslinking, GelMA hydrogel containing rhodamine B was soaked thoroughly. GelMA hydrogel was washed and observed using a fluorescence microscope. Likewise, the fluorescein labeling method was used to observe the activity of S. boulardii bioactive materials. S. boulardii was stained by Calcofluor White (CFW; final concentration: 10 mg/mL) for 10 min [28 (link)]. After being washed several times, S. boulardii bioactive materials were observed.
+ 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!