The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

8 protocols using hexamethyldisilane

1

Hydroxyapatite Materials Synthesis and Characterization

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
All the chemicals were used as received from the manufacturer. For the preparation of the HA materials, calcium nitrate tetrahydrate (Ca(NO3)·4H2O, AR), triethyl phosphate (P(OC2H5)3, AR), diammonium hydrogen phosphate ((NH4)2HPO4, AR), Pluronic F127, polyvinyl alcohol (PVA), and 10× concentrated phosphate buffered saline (10× PBS) all came from Sigma-Aldrich, while anhydrous ethanol was from Merck (Darmstadt, Germany). Protein adsorption and cell culture studies required bovine serum albumin (BSA), vitronectin, BCATM Protein Assay Kit, hexamethyldisilane (HMDS), and sodium dodecyl sulphate (SDS, AR) all from Sigma-Aldrich; Minimum Essential Media (MEM), Glutamax, Non-Essential Amino Acids (NEAA), Antibiotic-Antimycotic solution (Anti-Anti), and TrypLE Express were purchased from Invitrogen; MTS reagent from Promega, and Fetal Bovine Serum (FBS) from SAFC Biosciences (Hampshire, England). The water used in all experiments was passed through a Millipore (Boston, MA, USA) Milli Q ultrapure water purification system and had a resistivity higher than 18.2 MΩcm.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
2

Preparation for Scanning Electron Microscopy

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Samples were fixed in 4% formaldehyde for 24 h and dehydrated with increasing concentrations of ethanol (30%, 50%, 70%, 90%, and 100%) for 10 min each and then treated with hexamethyldisilane (Sigma-Aldrich) overnight for further water extraction. Dehydrated samples were then mounted on aluminium stubs with double sided carbon tape (Agar Scientific, Essex, UK), and imaged with a tabletop scanning electron microscope (TM3030Plus, Hitachi Hightech, Tokyo, JP) at appropriate magnifications.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
3

Preparation of Bacterial Samples for SEM

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Scanning electron microscope experiments were carried out at CDB Microscopy Core (Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania). Bacterial samples were washed three times with 50mM Na-cacodylate buffer, fixed for 2-3 hours with 2% glutaraldehyde in 50 mM Na-cacodylate buffer (pH 7.3), spun down over 0.22 μm filter membranes and dehydrated in an increasing ethanol concentration over a period of 1.5 hour. Dehydration in 100% ethanol was done three times. Dehydrated samples were incubated for 20 min in 50% Hexamethyldisilane (HMDS Sigma-Aldrich) in ethanol followed by three changes of 100% HMDS and followed by overnight air-drying as described previously.50 Then samples were mounted on stubs and sputter coated with gold palladium. Specimens were observed and photographed using a Quanta 250 FEG scanning electron microscope (FEI, Hillsboro, OR, USA) at 10 kV accelerating voltage.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
4

Scanning Electron Microscopy Analysis of Bacterial Colonization

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Bacterial colonization on MAP-PLA and commercial membranes was besides CFU semi quantitatively evaluated using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). After incubation in a humified atmosphere of 37 °C at 5% CO2, the culture medium was removed and cells were fixed with glutaraldehyde (Sigma, St. Louis, USA) 3% in PBS at a pH value of 7.4 for 24 h. After removal of the glutaraldehyde solution, the samples were dehydrated in an ascending alcohol dilution for 300 s for each series. After that, drying with hexamethyldisilane for 1 min (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, USA) and a gold vapor deposition with a thickness of 15 nm (SCD 500, CAL-Tec, Ashford, UK) were performed and SEM analysis (Jeol, Freising, Germany) was conducted at a voltage between 10–15 kV.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
5

Preparation of Bacterial Samples for SEM

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Scanning electron microscope experiments were carried out at CDB Microscopy Core (Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania). Bacterial samples were washed three times with 50mM Na-cacodylate buffer, fixed for 2-3 hours with 2% glutaraldehyde in 50 mM Na-cacodylate buffer (pH 7.3), spun down over 0.22 μm filter membranes and dehydrated in an increasing ethanol concentration over a period of 1.5 hour. Dehydration in 100% ethanol was done three times. Dehydrated samples were incubated for 20 min in 50% Hexamethyldisilane (HMDS Sigma-Aldrich) in ethanol followed by three changes of 100% HMDS and followed by overnight air-drying as described previously.50 Then samples were mounted on stubs and sputter coated with gold palladium. Specimens were observed and photographed using a Quanta 250 FEG scanning electron microscope (FEI, Hillsboro, OR, USA) at 10 kV accelerating voltage.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
6

Scanning Electron Microscopy of Microfluidic Chips

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM, FEI Nova Nano 650) was used to obtain the images of channels on the microfluidic chip. Samples were initially washed using PBS and fixed using formaldehyde (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) for 24 hr. The samples were then rinsed by a buffer solution and dehydrated by a series of gradually increasing ethanol concentrations in DI water from 50–100% v/v (at 10% interval) for 56 Sparta Ave, Newton, NJ 0786010–15 min at each concentration. Furthermore, the samples were chemically dried using hexamethyldisilane (Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO) and left to dry in a fume hood overnight. Prior to SEM imaging, the samples were then sputter-coated using gold-palladium using an EMS 550X Sputter Coater.
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
7

Osteoclast Progenitor Cell Adhesion and Viability on 3D-Printed Scaffolds

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
Osteoclast progenitors (1 × 106) were seeded onto the 3D-printed BG-/Mo-scaffolds and incubated in culture medium for 24 h. For cell adhesion and morphology, each sample was fixed in 2.5% glutaraldehyde (Sigma–Aldrich) overnight at 4 °C and then gradually dehydrated in ethanol solutions with gradient concentrations (10%, 20%, 40%, 60%, 80%, 90%, and 100%). Subsequently, the samples were critical-point dried using hexamethyldisilane (Sigma–Aldrich) at room temperature before sputter-coating with Pb/Au. Cell adhesion and morphology on both scaffolds were finally observed and compared using field-emission SEM (Hitachi S-4800).To assess cell viability, a Calcein-AM/PI Double-Stain Kit (Yeasen Biotechnology, Shanghai, China) was used according to the manufacturer’s instructions. Each sample was stained with 5 mL of PBS containing 15 μL of 200 calcein-AM and 5 μL of PI for 15 min in the dark. Then, each sample was rinsed and observed with a confocal laser microscope (A1 PLUS, Nikon, Tokyo, Japan).
+ Open protocol
+ Expand
8

Imaging Adherent Cells for SEM

Check if the same lab product or an alternative is used in the 5 most similar protocols
12 mm coverslips were coated with FN and put in a 24-well plate. 100.000 HUVECs were seeded in each well and grown to confluency in 2 days. TNFα was added 24 hours before the experiment. Cells were fixated in a 4% PFA and 2% glutaraldehyde in PBS++ solution for 1 hour. Afterwards, cells were dehydrated with increasing (50%, 60%, 70%, 80%, 90% to 96%) ethanol concentrations of 20 minutes each and submerged in hexamethyldisilane (Sigma-Aldrich) for 30 min. Next, samples were mounted on aluminum SEM stubs with Leit-C carbon cement (PLANO GmbH). A Leica EM ACE600 (Leica Microsystems) was used for sputter-coating with a 4 nm-thick platinum-palladium layer. Imaging was done on a Zeiss Sigma 300 SEM (Zeiss) at 2.00 or 3.00 kV, with magnifications ranging from 2.000x to 10.000x.
+ 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!