The film thickness was measured using an SQC‐310C thin‐film deposition system (Inficon). The transmittance and haze spectra were recorded using a UV–vis spectrometer (Shimadzu) in the wavelength range of 300–800 nm at 1‐nm intervals. Scanning electron microscope images were obtained using a field‐emission scanning electron microscope (Zeiss, Merlin). The impedance measurements were performed using a DH7000 electrochemical workstation. The current density, bias, and luminance measurements were conducted using a Keithley 2450 source meter and a Konica Minolta Chroma Meter CS‐200. The EL spectra were recorded using a PhotoResearch PR‐705 photometer. The EQE was calculated from the luminance, current density, and EL spectra data, assuming a Lambertian distribution.
Field emission scanning electron microscope
Manufactured by Zeiss
Sourced in Germany, United States
The field emission scanning electron microscope (FE-SEM) is a high-resolution imaging tool that utilizes a focused electron beam to scan the surface of a specimen. It provides detailed information about the topography, composition, and other properties of the sample at the nanoscale level.
Automatically generated - may contain errors
Lab products found in correlation
Synergy htx, by Agilent Technologies (2 mentions)
Eclipse ti, by Nikon (2 mentions)
Minolta chroma meter cs 200, by Konica Minolta (1 mentions)
Uv vis spectrometer, by Shimadzu (1 mentions)
Gemini 500, by Zeiss (1 mentions)
Uv 2550 spectrophotometer, by Shimadzu (1 mentions)
F 4600 spectrophotometer, by Hitachi (1 mentions)
X pert pro diffractometer, by Malvern Panalytical (1 mentions)
Jem 2100, by JEOL (1 mentions)
Uv 2550, by Shimadzu (1 mentions)
Escalab 250 xi xps system, by Thermo Fisher Scientific (1 mentions)
Jem 1010 ex electron microscope, by JEOL (1 mentions)
Ultrascan 4000, by Ametek (1 mentions)
Jem 1230, by Ametek (1 mentions)
Jem 1200ex, by Ametek (1 mentions)
Sputter coater, by Leica (1 mentions)
D8 advanced x, by Bruker (1 mentions)
Ppms dynacool, by Quantum Design (1 mentions)
Ds ri2, by Nikon (1 mentions)
Cpd300, by Leica (1 mentions)
43 protocols using field emission scanning electron microscope
1
Characterization of Thin Film Properties
2
Morphological Analysis of Samples
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
The morphology of the samples was investigated using a Gemini 500 Carl Zeiss Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscope (FESEM) working in both High Vacuum (HV) and Variable Pressure (VP) modes, from 0.2 to 30 kV, equipped with LaB6 filament, NanoVP mode, InLens and SE2 detectors.
3
Synthesis and Characterization of Silver Nanoparticles
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
The synthesis of the AgNPs (reduction of the Ag+ ions by G. pinnata extract) was observed in UV–Vis spectrophotometer (Lambda 35R PerkinElmer, USA) ranges of 400–600 nm at a resolution of 1 nm in RT. The average size and surface charge of AgNPs were analyzed by Zetasizer (ZS 90, Malvern, UK). For measurement of the intensity of synthesized silver nanoparticles, the as-prepared AgNPs were subjected to Raman spectroscopy using Lab Ram HR 800 Micro-Raman Spectroscope (Horiba Jobin –Yvon, France) with an excitation wavelength of 514 nm Ar+ ion laser (Dieringer et al., 2006 (link)). The nano-scale morphology of AgNPs were confirmed by field emission scanning electron microscope (Zeiss, Germany) performed at acceleration voltage of 15KV. The detail procedures of all these characterizations were done according to the previous published articles from our research (Mohanta et al., 2015 (link), Mohanta et al., 2018 (link), Mohanta et al., 2017 (link)). The surface morphology of silver nanoparticles was also examined using an Atomic Force Microscope (AFM) and the as-prepared AgNPs solution was drop wise casted over the silicon wafer followed by drying and were subjected to AFM studies using the AFM device (Bruker AXS Pte Ltd., Innova) (Nayak et al., 2015 (link), Nayak et al., 2016a (link)).
4
Electrochemical Characterization of FGPC
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Electrochemical measurements were performed on CHI660D electrochemical workstation (Chenhua Co. Ltd., Shanghai, China). A conventional three-electrode system, which was composed of a bare or modified acupuncture needle as the working electrode, an Ag/AgCl electrode as the reference electrode and a platinum wire as the auxiliary electrode, was employed throughout the experiment. During the in vivo measurements, the solutions (PBS or L-Arg) were delivered by a LSP02-1B microinjection pump (Baoding Lange, Baoding, China). UV-vis absorption spectra were recorded on a UV-2550 spectrophotometer (Shimadzu, Japan). X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) measurement was carried out on an XSAM800 photoelectron spectrometer (Kratos, UK). Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images were obtained on a field-emission scanning electron microscope (Zeiss, Germany). UV-visible spectra, XPS and SEM were used to characterize the structure of FGPC. All measurements were carried out at a room temperature.
5
Physiochemical Characterization of Nanoparticles
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
The particle size and zeta potential of Man-PLL-RT/OVA/CpG, PLL-RT/OVA/CpG, PLL-RT/pDNA, and HA/PLL-RT/pDNA nanoparticles were detected by a zeta potential/BI-90Plus particle size analyzer (Brookhaven, USA) at room temperature (n = 5). The morphology of Man-PLL-RT/OVA/CpG and HA/PLL-RT/pDNA nanoparticles were observed by field emission scanning electron microscope (Zeiss, Germany). The stability of Man-PLL-RT/OVA/CpG and HA/PLL-RT/pDNA nanoparticles were further determined. Briefly, Man-PLL-RT/OVA/CpG or HA/PLL-RT/pDNA nanoparticles were gently mixed in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS, pH 7.4). The final concentration of nucleic acid was 0.05 mg mL−1. The mean diameters of the nanoparticles were detected once a day for a week. To further stimulate the microenvironment in the body, the stability of HA/PLL-RT/pDNA nanoparticles was evaluated in bovine serum albumin (FBS). The final concentration of pDNA was 0.05 mg/mL. The mean diameters of the complexes were monitored after different periods of incubation time (1 h, 3 h, 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 72 h).
6
PF127 Hydrogels for Drug Delivery
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
PF127 hydrogel were prepared by a “cold method” as described in previous reports 27 (link). Briefly, 0.25 g PF127 was mixed with 1mL cold deionized water and stirred gently at 4 ℃ until complete dissolution. For PFI hydrogel preparation, 0.5 mg ICG were added to 1 mL PF127 hydrogel and stirred gently at 4 ℃ to form favored hydrogel. For PFIR hydrogel preparation, 10 mg ropivacaine and 0.5 mg ICG were added to 1 mL PF127 hydrogel and stirred gently at 4 ℃ to form hydrogel. For PFIRM hydrogel preparation, 10mg ropivacaine, 0.5 mg ICG and 0.3 mg imiquimod were added to 1 mL PF127 hydrogel and stirred gently at 4 ℃ to form hydrogel. All gels were kept overnight at 4 °C until a homogenous solution was obtained. The morphology of hydrogels was observed by Carl Zeiss field-emission scanning electron microscope after a lyophilization.
7
Membrane and Electrode Morphology Analysis
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
The scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images were acquired by using a field emission scanning electron microscope (Carl Zeiss) at an acceleration voltage of 10.0 kV to observe the morphologies of the membrane and electrode layers of the samples. The water behaviour was examined using ESEM (XL-30 FEG). We observed the water condensation behaviour with respect to time based on the relative humidity (RH; about 95%) by maintaining the chamber pressure at ~5.1 Torr and the substrate temperature at ~2 °C.
8
Comprehensive Characterization of MoS2 Nanostructures
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
The morphology of the as-prepared MoS2 was characterized by TEM (JEOL JEM-2100, Japan) operated at 200 kV. The MoS2 dispersion was further diluted with ethanol and dropped on a carbon-coated film copper grid for subsequent TEM observation. The X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) analysis was conducted using an ESCALAB 250 Xi XPS system (Thermo Fisher Scientific, American). UV-visible spectra were measured by UV-2550 (Shimadzu Co. Ltd., Japan). Raman spectra were taken by using Invia Renishaw spectrometer (RM 1000, England) equipped with 514.5 nm laser line. X-ray diffraction (XRD) analysis was conducted on PANalytical X’Pert Pro diffractometer (PANalytical, Holland). The fluorescence spectra were obtained by a Hitachi F-4600 spectrophotometer (Hitachi Co. Ltd., Japan). Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) images were obtained on a field-emission scanning electron microscope (Zeiss, Germany). All electrical measurements were recorded with a Keithley 4200 semiconductor characterization system and a shield probe station (Everbeing BD-6, Taiwan).
9
Leaf Ultrastructure Imaging Protocols
Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
+ Expand
Specimens for TEM and SEM were prepared from the maximum tillering stage leaves. For SEM, harvested leaves were fixed overnight at 4°C with slightly modified Karnovsky’s fixative consisting of 2% paraformaldehyde, 2% glutaraldehyde, and 50 mM sodium cacodylate buffer at pH 7.2, and then washed three times with 50 mM sodium cacodylate buffer. Samples were post-fixed with 1% osmium tetroxide in 50 mM sodium cacodylate buffer and then washed three times with distilled water. Samples were treated with 0.5% uranyl acetate, washed with an ethanol gradient series, and then treated with hexamethyldisilazane (HMDS). Samples were mounted on platinum stubs, coated with gold, and examined by a Field-Emission Scanning electron microscope (Sigma, Carl Zeiss).
TEM samples were fixed, post-fixed, and dehydrated as described in SEM, and then embedded in propylene oxide and Spurr’s resin overnight at 70°C. Embedded samples were sliced to 60 mm with an ultramicrotome (MT–X, RMC), and then stained with 2% uranyl acetate for 5 min and Reynold’s lead citrate for 2 min at 25°C. Processed samples were examined using a JEM-1010 EX electron microscope (JEOL,https://www.jeol.co.jp/en/ ).
TEM samples were fixed, post-fixed, and dehydrated as described in SEM, and then embedded in propylene oxide and Spurr’s resin overnight at 70°C. Embedded samples were sliced to 60 mm with an ultramicrotome (MT–X, RMC), and then stained with 2% uranyl acetate for 5 min and Reynold’s lead citrate for 2 min at 25°C. Processed samples were examined using a JEM-1010 EX electron microscope (JEOL,
10
Transmission Electron Microscopy Imaging
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
Revolutionizing how scientists
search and build protocols!