{% extends "layout.html" %} {% block title %}Results{% endblock %} {% block lead %}You can describe the results of your project and your future plans here.{% endblock %} {% block page_content %}
Figure 1. Biologically Synthesized Nanoparticle by 5 mM FeCl3 Induction Attached to Biomass.
Figure 2. Biologically Synthesized Nanoparticle by 5 mM FeCl3 Induction Detached from Biomass through ultrasonication.
Figure 3. Negative Control for Nanoparticle without Ferric Ion Induction.
Figure 4. Size Distribution of the Biologically Synthesized Nanoparticles.
From the size distribution statistical data, the Polydispersity Index of the samples in each view field was calculated and shown as below:
Figure 5. Polydispersity Index of the Samples in Each View Field.
All the figures used for data processing are labelled and shown in the supplementary data section below.
Figure 6. Selected Electron Diffraction Pattern of Biologically Synthesized Nanoparticles Taken in 8/23
Figure 7. Selected Electron Diffraction Pattern of Biologically Synthesized Nanoparticles Taken in 8/25
Figure 1. Biologically Synthesized Nanoparticle Size Distribution Pattern by DLS Analysis.
From the size distribution pattern, the average hydrodynamic diameter of nanoparticles is 7.23 nm.
The size distribution pattern of the chemically synthesized nanoparticle using log scale is
shown below:
Figure 2. Chemically Synthesized Nanoparticle Size Distribution Pattern by DLS Analysis.
From the size distribution pattern, the average hydrodynamic diameter of nanoparticles is 252.41 nm.
Actually the real size of the chemically synthesized nanoparticles by TEM analysis is around 20 nm,
but
the
hydrodynamic diameter of the nanoparticles sythesized by us is much larger than their real size due to the
aggregration of the nanoparticles,
this also indicates that the chemically synthesized nanoparticles
are not that stable and are easier to get precipitated out.
For clearer representation, the linear scale size distribution pattern of the chemically synthesized
nanoparticles is shown below:
Figure 3. Chemically Synthesized Nanoparticle Size Distribution Pattern by DLS Analysis.
Figure 4. Zeta Potential Measurement of the Biologically Synthesized Nanoparticles.
And the supplementary all field data of the Zeta Potential measurement of the biologically synthesized nanoparticles is shown in the pdf file below:Figure 5. Zeta Potential Measurement of the Chemically Synthesized Nanoparticles.
And the supplementary all field data of the Zeta Potential measurement of the chemically synthesized nanoparticles is shown in the pdf file below:Figure 1. Hydrodynamic diameter summary figure
Figure 2. Polydispersity index summary figure
Figure 3. Zeta potential summary figure
Figure 4. Hydrodynamic diameter summary figure
Figure 5. Polydispersity index summary figure
Cell Strain | Treatment of the cells | ||
---|---|---|---|
Anti HER2 scFv domain antibody | Anti His tag antibody (mouse derived) | Goat Anti-Mouse-IgG | |
SK-BR-3 treatment 1 (three replica) |
- | + | + |
SK-BR-3 treatment 2 (three replica) |
+ | + | + |
SK-BR-3 treatment 3 (three replica) |
+ | + | - |
SK-BR-3 treatment 4 (three replica) |
+ | - | + |
MDA-MB-231 treatment 1 (four replica) |
- | + | + |
MDA-MB-231 treatment 2 (three replica) |
+ | + | + |
MDA-MB-231 treatment 3 (two replica) |
+ | + | - |
MDA-MB-231 treatment 4 (two replica) |
+ | - | + |
Figure 1. Mean Fluorescent Intensity of the SK-BR3 under Different Treatments.
Figure 2. Confocal Microscopy Result of the SK-BR3 under Primary and Secondary Antibody Treatment.
And the corresponding figure under bright field is shown below:
Figure 3. Bright Field Channel Result of the SK-BR3 under Primary and Secondary Antibody Treatment.
Figure 4. Confocal Microscopy Result of the SK-BR3 under Primary and Tertiary Antibody Treatment.
And the corresponding figure under bright field is shown below:
Figure 5. Bright Field Channel Result of the SK-BR3 under Primary and Tertiary Antibody Treatment.
The flow cytometry results also support the conclusion that the secondary antibody didn't show specificity towards the scFv domain.
Figure 6. Flow Cytometry Result of the SK-BR3 under Different Treatment.
Figure 7. Western Blot Analysis Result.
Figure 1. cytotoxicity test for her-2 negative cell(MDA-MB-231).
Figure 2. cytotoxicity test for her-2 negative cell(BT-474).
Figure 3. Treatment1 chem-synthesis nps cytotoxicity test(HER2 positive cells).
Figure 4. Treatment1 chem-synthesis nps cytotoxicity test(HER2 negative cells).
Figure 5. Treatment2 chem-synthesis nps cytotoxicity test(HER2 positive cells).
Figure 6. Treatment2 chem-synthesis nps cytotoxicity test(HER2 negative cells).
Figure 7. BT-474 cytotoxicity test result (HER2 positive cells).
Figure 8. 4h-Treatment1 chem-synthesis nps cytotoxicity test (HER2 positive cells).
Figure 9. 4h-Treatment2 chem-synthesis nps cytotoxicity test (HER2 positive cells).
Figure 10. 2h Cytotoxicity of Biologically Synthesized Nanoparticle to BT-474
Figure 11. 2h Cytotoxicity of Biologically Synthesized Nanoparticle to MDA-MB-231