The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

Imagej

Manufactured by GE Healthcare
Sourced in United States

ImageJ is an open-source image processing software developed for scientific use. It allows for the viewing, editing, analyzing, and processing of digital images and micrographs. ImageJ provides a wide range of tools and functions for image manipulation and data extraction, making it a valuable tool for researchers and scientists working with microscopy and other imaging data.

Automatically generated - may contain errors

20 protocols using imagej

1

Quantitative Structural Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Yields were estimated by analyzing specific bands in native agarose gel electrophoresis or PAGE. The ratio between the fluorescent intensity of a target band and that of the sum of the entire lane in were taken as estimates of the yield of structural formation. Software ImageJ (version 1.52a)44 (link) and ImageQuant (GE Healthcare, version 8.1) were used to calculate the fluorescent intensity.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Monitoring DNA Modifications by PE Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The DNA modifications introduced by DMS, KMnO4, or P1 nuclease (Sigma, Merck KGaA, Darmstadt, Germany) were monitored by PE analysis. The reaction conditions, mixture separation, and product visualization were described previously [42 (link)]. The gels were scanned using a Typhoon FLA 9500 (GE Healthcare, Chicago, IL, USA) and analyzed using ImageQuant (GE Healthcare, Chicago, IL, USA) and imagej (imagej.nih.gov/ij/">https://imagej.nih.gov/ij/ accessed on 13 June 2021).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Quantitative Image Analysis Protocol

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All the assay data were quantified using ImageJ (https://imaaei.nih.aov/ii/) and ImageQuant (GE Healthcare life Sciences). The dot plots in
Figures 1, 3, and 5 were generated by Prism software
(GraphPad) and black bars on the graph show averages with independent replicates shown as dots. The detail calculations were in
the method section.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Quantitative Western Blot Analysis of Cerebella

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Cerebella were dissected from mice and lysed in RIPA lysis buffer [50mM Tris HCl, pH7.4, 150mM NaCl, 1% sodium deoxycholate, 1% NP-40, 0.2% SDS, phosphatase (Sigma) and protease inhibitors cocktail (Roche)]. After three cycles of freeze and thaw, proteins were separated on a 12% or 15% SDS-PAGE gel and transferred onto a nitrocellulose membrane. The following primary antibodies were used: anti-ATXN1 (rabbit 11NQ, Orr lab), anti-PSD95 (Biolegend), and alpha-tubulin (mouse, Sigma). Signals from secondary antibodies linked to horseradish peroxidase (HRP) (GE Healthcare) were detected using Amersham ECL Western Blotting Detection Reagent (GE Healthcare) and ImageQuant LAS 4000 imager (GE Healthcare); protein levels were quantified using ImageQuant (GE healthcare) and ImageJ. Data was analyzed with one-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni post-hoc test.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Comprehensive Neurodegenerative Disease Analysis

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Statistical evaluation of behavioral analysis, immunohistochemistry, and Western blotting results was performed using Prism 8 (GraphPad Software). For Rotarod test and body weight data, a two-way ANOVA with Fisher’s LSD test was used at each age. The Kaplan–Meier method was used to analyze survival and onset in each SOD1G93A mouse strain. Immunohistochemistry and Western blotting results were analyzed using either ImageJ or ImageQuant software (GE Healthcare).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Western Blot Analysis of MTAP Protein

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The Western blot analysis was performed as previously described [42 (link)]. In brief, cells were lysed with lysis buffer (50 mM Tris; pH 7.6; 150 mM NaCl; 5 mM EDTA; 1 mM Na3VO4; 10 mM NaF; 10 mM sodium pyrophosphate; 1% NP-40) containing protease inhibitor cocktail (0.01 M EDTA; 1 mM DTT; 1 mM Leupeptin; 1 mM PMSF; and 1 µM Aprotinin). The cell lysate was placed on ice for 60 min and centrifuged at 17,982× g for 15 min. The total protein was quantified using the Bradford method (Quick Start TM Bradford Protein Assay; Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA, USA). Total proteins were separated by 12% polyacrylamide gel and transferred onto Trans-Blot Turbo Midi Nitrocellulose Transfer Packs (Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA, USA). The membrane was incubated with primary followed by secondary antibodies after blocking with 5% non-fat milk. Immunodetection was performed using the ECL KIT (Amersham Biosciences, Uppsala, Uppland, Sweden) in ImageQuant LAS 4000 mini (GE Healthcare Life Sciences, Pittsburgh, PA, USA) and quantified by the platform for scientific image analysis ImageJ (NIH) [46 (link)]. The following antibodies were used: polyclonal anti-MTAP antibody (Proteintech, Rosemont, IL, USA) diluted 1:800 and anti-β actin antibody (Cell Signaling Technology, Danvers, MA, USA) diluted at 1:2000.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Fluorescence-based GEN1 Cleavage Assay

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All DNA substrates (Figure 5—source data 1) were synthesized by Eurofins/MWG (Ebersberg, Germany), resuspended in annealing buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl pH 8.0, 50 mM NaCl, 0.1 mM EDTA), annealed by heating to 85˚C for 5 min and slow-cooling to room temperature. Different amounts of GEN1 proteins (as indicated) were mixed with 40 nM 6FAM-labeled DNA substrates in 20 mM Tris-HCl pH 8.0, 50 ng/μl bovine serum albumin (BSA) and 1 mM DTT. Reactions were initiated by adding 5 mM MgCl2, incubated at 37°C for 15 min and terminated by adding 15 mM EDTA, 0.3% SDS and further, DNA substrates were deproteinized using 1 mg/ml proteinase K at 37°C for 15 min. Products were separated by 8% 1x TBE native polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, the fluorescence signal detected with a Typhoon FLA 7000 phosphoimager (GE Healthcare), quantified with IMAGEJ (GE Healthcare) and visualized by GNUPLOT (Williams et al., 2015 ).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Quantification of Cellular Protein Levels

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Immunoblot signals were quantified using Image J or ImageQuant (GE Healthcare) software, for quantification of cell surface PrP levels by FACS analysis mean fluorescence values were used for statistical evaluation. All values were expressed as percentage of the control value (100%). For comparison of multiple groups, one-way ANOVA followed by post hoc analysis with Dunnett’s multiple comparison test was used. For pairwise comparisons, nonparametric Mann-Whitney tests were used. Statistical analysis was done using GraphPad Prism software.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
9

RIG-I Enzymatic ATPase Activity Assay

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
The RIG-I ATPase assay was performed as previously described55 . Briefly, 250 nM of in vitro–transcribed RNA were incubated with 100 nM of RIG-I protein purified from insect cells (as previously described19 (link)) and 3 mM unlabeled ATP, including trace amounts of [γ-32 (link)P]ATP in EMSA buffer (5 mM MgCl, 50 mM KCl, 50 mM HEPES, 1 mM TCEP, 0.1 mg/ml BSA, pH 7) for 0, 0.5, 1, 2, or 3 h at 37 °C. Free phosphate was separated from unhydrolyzed ATP by thin layer chromatography in TLC running buffer (1 M formic acid, 0.5 M LiCl) on polyethyleneimine cellulose TLC plates (Sigma-Aldrich). [γ-32 (link)P]Pi and [γ-32 (link)P]ATP were detected using a phosphor-imaging system (GE Healthcare), quantified using ImageJ, and the percentage of hydrolyzed ATP for every time point was calculated. The average value of three replicates was calculated and average hydrolyzed ATP was plotted against time.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
10

CD3ε Phospho-Mimetic Protein Purification

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
For the PD assay, the different phospho-mimetic variants of cytoplasmic tails of human CD3ε were cloned into the pRP261 vector and fused C-terminally to GST. The E.coli strain BL21 was transformed with the corresponding vectors. After 3 h induction with 1 mM IPTG, bacteria were lysed. GST-CD3ε fusion proteins were purified using glutathione sepharose beads (GE Healthcare). CD3ε PD assay was performed overnight at 4°C. After washing, proteins were separated by SDS-PAGE and immunoblotted in a semi-dry chamber for 1 h at 18 V. Chemiluminescence was used to image protein bands using a CCD camera (ImageQuant LAS 4000; GE Healthcare). ImageJ and ImageQuantTL software were used to determine the relative band intensity (GE Healthcare).
+ 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!