4.6 Article

The influence of different liquid environments on the atomic force microscopy detection of living bEnd.3 cells

期刊

ANALYTICAL METHODS
卷 13, 期 21, 页码 2384-2390

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d1ay00567g

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2017YFE0112100]
  2. EU H2020 Program (MNR4SCELL) [734174]
  3. Jilin Provincial Science and Technology Program [20180414002GH, 20180414081GH, 20180520203JH, 20190702002GH, 20200901011SF]
  4. 111 Project of China [D17017]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study conducted cell imaging and mechanical detection using AFM in different liquid environments, and found that a liquid containing fewer ions and organics can improve imaging quality and provide similar mechanical detection results within a short period of time.
Atomic force microscopy (AFM) is one of the most important tools in the field of biomedical science, and it can be used to perform the high-resolution three-dimensional imaging of samples in liquid environments to obtain their physical properties (such as surface potentials and mechanical properties). The influence of the liquid environment on the image quality of the sample and the detection results cannot be ignored. In this work, quantitative imaging (QI) mode AFM imaging and mechanical detection were performed on mouse brain microvascular endothelial (bEnd.3) cells in different liquid environments. The gray-level variance product (SMD2) function was used to evaluate the imaging quality of the cells in liquids with different physical properties, and the variations in cell mechanical properties were quantitatively analyzed. An AFM detection liquid containing less ions and organics compared with the traditional culture medium, which is beneficial for improving the imaging quality, is introduced, and it shows similar mechanical detection results within 3 h. This can greatly reduce the detection costs and could have positive significance in the field of AFM living-cell detection.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据