ArticlePloS one2022
Preparation of biological monolayers for producing high-resolution scanning electron micrographs.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond Viral Control: Tenofovir's Hidden Impact on Blood-Brain Barrier Endothelial Cells.Microcirculation (New York, N.Y. : 1994) · 2026Article
- Article
- HIV-1 viral protein effect on cerebral microvasculature: An in vitro blood-brain barrier model.Physiological reports · 2025Article
- The Cyclic Peptide Cyclo-zp80r ControlsFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Field Emission Scanning Electron Microscopy (FE-SEM) as an Approach for Membrane Surface Mapping in Cell Biology.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025Article
- Recent Advances in Fluorescent Nanoparticles for Stimulated Emission Depletion Imaging.Biosensors · 2024Review
- Exosomes form tunneling nanotubes (TUNTs) in the blood-brain barrier: a nano-anatomical perspective of barrier genesis.Frontiers in molecular neuroscience · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) provides a technical platform for nanoscopic mapping of biological structures. Correct preparation of SEM samples can provide an unprecedented understanding of the nexus between cellular morphology and topography. This comparative study critically examines two coating methods for preparing biological samples for scanning electron microscopy, while also providing novel advice on how to prepare in vitro epithelial or endothelial samples for high-resolution scanning-electron microscopy (HR-SEM). Two obstacles often confront the biologist when investigating cellular structures grown under tissue culture conditions, namely., how to prepare and present the biological samples to the HR-SEM microscope without affecting topographical membrane and cellular structural alterations. Firstly, our use of the Millicell cellulose inserts on which to grow our cellular samples in preparation for HR-SEM is both novel and advantageous to comparing the permeability function of cells to their morphological function. Secondly, biological material is often non-conducting, thermally sensitive and fragile and, therefore, needs to be fixed correctly and coated with thin conducting metal to ensure high-resolution detail of samples. Immortalized mouse brain endothelial cells (bEnd5) was used as a basis for describing the preferences in the use of the protocol. We compare two biological sample coating modalities for the visualizing and analysis of texturized, topographical, membranous ultrastructures of brain endothelial cell (BEC) confluent monolayers, namely, carbon and gold:palladium (Au:Pd) sputter coating in preparation for HR-SEM. BEC monolayers sputter-coated with these two modalities produced three-dimensional micrographs which have distinctly different topographical detail from which the nanostructural cellular data can be examined. The two coating methods display differences in the amount of nanoscopic detail that could be resolved in the nanosized membrane cytoarchitecture of BEC monolayers. The micrographical data clearly showed that Au:Pd sputter-coated samples generate descript imagery, providing useful information for profiling membrane nanostructures compared to carbon-coated samples. The recommendations regarding the contrast in two modalities would provide the necessary guidance to biological microscopists in preparing tissue culture samples for HR-SEM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.