EV-TRACK

Search > Results

You searched for: EV140029 (EV-TRACK ID)

Showing 1 - 12 of 12

Results list Study Tree

Details	EV-TRACK ID	Experiment nr.	Species	Sample type	Separation protocol	First author	Year	EV-METRIC
	EV140029	1/12	Homo sapiens	NAY	(d)(U)C	Jeppesen DK	2014	44%
Study summary Full title Comparative analysis of discrete exosome fractions obtained by differential centrifugation All authors Jeppesen DK, Hvam ML, Primdahl-Bengtson B, Boysen AT, Whitehead B, Dyrskjøt L, Orntoft TF, Howard KA, Ostenfeld MS Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ i (show more...)BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ in size, density and composition. The standard isolation method for exosomes is centrifugation of fluid samples, typically at 100,000×g or above. Knowledge of the effect of discrete ultracentrifugation speeds on the purification from different cell types, however, is limited. METHODS: We examined the effect of applying differential centrifugation g-forces ranging from 33,000×g to 200,000×g on exosome yield and purity, using 2 unrelated human cell lines, embryonic kidney HEK293 cells and bladder carcinoma FL3 cells. The fractions were evaluated by nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), total protein quantification and immunoblotting for CD81, TSG101, syntenin, VDAC1 and calreticulin. RESULTS: NTA revealed the lowest background particle count in Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium media devoid of phenol red and cleared by 200,000×g overnight centrifugation. The centrifugation tube fill level impacted the sedimentation efficacy. Comparative analysis by NTA, protein quantification, and detection of exosomal and contamination markers identified differences in vesicle size, concentration and composition of the obtained fractions. In addition, HEK293 and FL3 vesicles displayed marked differences in sedimentation characteristics. Exosomes were pelleted already at 33,000×g, a g-force which also removed most contaminating microsomes. Optimal vesicle-to-protein yield was obtained at 67,000×g for HEK293 cells but 100,000×g for FL3 cells. Relative expression of exosomal markers (TSG101, CD81, syntenin) suggested presence of exosome subpopulations with variable sedimentation characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Specific g-force/k factor usage during differential centrifugation greatly influences the purity and yield of exosomes. The vesicle sedimentation profile differed between the 2 cell lines. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (84th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type) Reported Not reported Not applicable EV-enriched proteins Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins non EV-enriched protein Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein qualitative and quantitative analysis Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected. electron microscopy images Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image density gradient Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs EV density Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density ultracentrifugation specifics Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps antibody specifics Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution lysate preparation Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition Study data Sample type Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes Separation protocol Separation protocol Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the different steps of the separation protocol. dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography IAF = immuno-affinity capture (d)(U)C Adj. k-factor 475.5 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: CD81/ TSG101/ Syntenin non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 90 Pelleting: rotor type 70Ti Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 475.5 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins CD81/ Syntenin/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NTA

	EV140029	2/12	Homo sapiens	NAY	(d)(U)C	Jeppesen DK	2014	44%
Study summary Full title Comparative analysis of discrete exosome fractions obtained by differential centrifugation All authors Jeppesen DK, Hvam ML, Primdahl-Bengtson B, Boysen AT, Whitehead B, Dyrskjøt L, Orntoft TF, Howard KA, Ostenfeld MS Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ i (show more...)BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ in size, density and composition. The standard isolation method for exosomes is centrifugation of fluid samples, typically at 100,000×g or above. Knowledge of the effect of discrete ultracentrifugation speeds on the purification from different cell types, however, is limited. METHODS: We examined the effect of applying differential centrifugation g-forces ranging from 33,000×g to 200,000×g on exosome yield and purity, using 2 unrelated human cell lines, embryonic kidney HEK293 cells and bladder carcinoma FL3 cells. The fractions were evaluated by nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), total protein quantification and immunoblotting for CD81, TSG101, syntenin, VDAC1 and calreticulin. RESULTS: NTA revealed the lowest background particle count in Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium media devoid of phenol red and cleared by 200,000×g overnight centrifugation. The centrifugation tube fill level impacted the sedimentation efficacy. Comparative analysis by NTA, protein quantification, and detection of exosomal and contamination markers identified differences in vesicle size, concentration and composition of the obtained fractions. In addition, HEK293 and FL3 vesicles displayed marked differences in sedimentation characteristics. Exosomes were pelleted already at 33,000×g, a g-force which also removed most contaminating microsomes. Optimal vesicle-to-protein yield was obtained at 67,000×g for HEK293 cells but 100,000×g for FL3 cells. Relative expression of exosomal markers (TSG101, CD81, syntenin) suggested presence of exosome subpopulations with variable sedimentation characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Specific g-force/k factor usage during differential centrifugation greatly influences the purity and yield of exosomes. The vesicle sedimentation profile differed between the 2 cell lines. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (84th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type) Reported Not reported Not applicable EV-enriched proteins Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins non EV-enriched protein Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein qualitative and quantitative analysis Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected. electron microscopy images Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image density gradient Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs EV density Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density ultracentrifugation specifics Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps antibody specifics Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution lysate preparation Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition Study data Sample type Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes Separation protocol Separation protocol Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the different steps of the separation protocol. dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography IAF = immuno-affinity capture (d)(U)C Adj. k-factor 234.2 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: CD81/ TSG101/ Syntenin non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 50,000 g and 100,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 90 Pelleting: rotor type 70Ti Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 234.2 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins CD81/ Syntenin/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NTA

	EV140029	3/12	Homo sapiens	NAY	(d)(U)C	Jeppesen DK	2014	44%
Study summary Full title Comparative analysis of discrete exosome fractions obtained by differential centrifugation All authors Jeppesen DK, Hvam ML, Primdahl-Bengtson B, Boysen AT, Whitehead B, Dyrskjøt L, Orntoft TF, Howard KA, Ostenfeld MS Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ i (show more...)BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ in size, density and composition. The standard isolation method for exosomes is centrifugation of fluid samples, typically at 100,000×g or above. Knowledge of the effect of discrete ultracentrifugation speeds on the purification from different cell types, however, is limited. METHODS: We examined the effect of applying differential centrifugation g-forces ranging from 33,000×g to 200,000×g on exosome yield and purity, using 2 unrelated human cell lines, embryonic kidney HEK293 cells and bladder carcinoma FL3 cells. The fractions were evaluated by nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), total protein quantification and immunoblotting for CD81, TSG101, syntenin, VDAC1 and calreticulin. RESULTS: NTA revealed the lowest background particle count in Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium media devoid of phenol red and cleared by 200,000×g overnight centrifugation. The centrifugation tube fill level impacted the sedimentation efficacy. Comparative analysis by NTA, protein quantification, and detection of exosomal and contamination markers identified differences in vesicle size, concentration and composition of the obtained fractions. In addition, HEK293 and FL3 vesicles displayed marked differences in sedimentation characteristics. Exosomes were pelleted already at 33,000×g, a g-force which also removed most contaminating microsomes. Optimal vesicle-to-protein yield was obtained at 67,000×g for HEK293 cells but 100,000×g for FL3 cells. Relative expression of exosomal markers (TSG101, CD81, syntenin) suggested presence of exosome subpopulations with variable sedimentation characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Specific g-force/k factor usage during differential centrifugation greatly influences the purity and yield of exosomes. The vesicle sedimentation profile differed between the 2 cell lines. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (84th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type) Reported Not reported Not applicable EV-enriched proteins Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins non EV-enriched protein Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein qualitative and quantitative analysis Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected. electron microscopy images Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image density gradient Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs EV density Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density ultracentrifugation specifics Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps antibody specifics Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution lysate preparation Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition Study data Sample type Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes Separation protocol Separation protocol Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the different steps of the separation protocol. dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography IAF = immuno-affinity capture (d)(U)C Adj. k-factor 156.9 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: CD81/ TSG101/ Syntenin non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 90 Pelleting: rotor type 70Ti Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 156.9 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins CD81/ Syntenin/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NTA

	EV140029	4/12	Homo sapiens	NAY	(d)(U)C	Jeppesen DK	2014	44%
Study summary Full title Comparative analysis of discrete exosome fractions obtained by differential centrifugation All authors Jeppesen DK, Hvam ML, Primdahl-Bengtson B, Boysen AT, Whitehead B, Dyrskjøt L, Orntoft TF, Howard KA, Ostenfeld MS Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ i (show more...)BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ in size, density and composition. The standard isolation method for exosomes is centrifugation of fluid samples, typically at 100,000×g or above. Knowledge of the effect of discrete ultracentrifugation speeds on the purification from different cell types, however, is limited. METHODS: We examined the effect of applying differential centrifugation g-forces ranging from 33,000×g to 200,000×g on exosome yield and purity, using 2 unrelated human cell lines, embryonic kidney HEK293 cells and bladder carcinoma FL3 cells. The fractions were evaluated by nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), total protein quantification and immunoblotting for CD81, TSG101, syntenin, VDAC1 and calreticulin. RESULTS: NTA revealed the lowest background particle count in Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium media devoid of phenol red and cleared by 200,000×g overnight centrifugation. The centrifugation tube fill level impacted the sedimentation efficacy. Comparative analysis by NTA, protein quantification, and detection of exosomal and contamination markers identified differences in vesicle size, concentration and composition of the obtained fractions. In addition, HEK293 and FL3 vesicles displayed marked differences in sedimentation characteristics. Exosomes were pelleted already at 33,000×g, a g-force which also removed most contaminating microsomes. Optimal vesicle-to-protein yield was obtained at 67,000×g for HEK293 cells but 100,000×g for FL3 cells. Relative expression of exosomal markers (TSG101, CD81, syntenin) suggested presence of exosome subpopulations with variable sedimentation characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Specific g-force/k factor usage during differential centrifugation greatly influences the purity and yield of exosomes. The vesicle sedimentation profile differed between the 2 cell lines. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (84th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type) Reported Not reported Not applicable EV-enriched proteins Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins non EV-enriched protein Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein qualitative and quantitative analysis Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected. electron microscopy images Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image density gradient Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs EV density Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density ultracentrifugation specifics Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps antibody specifics Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution lysate preparation Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition Study data Sample type Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes Separation protocol Separation protocol Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the different steps of the separation protocol. dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography IAF = immuno-affinity capture (d)(U)C Adj. k-factor 117.9 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: CD81/ TSG101/ Syntenin non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 90 Pelleting: rotor type 70Ti Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 117.9 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins CD81/ Syntenin/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NTA

	EV140029	5/12	Homo sapiens	NAY	(d)(U)C	Jeppesen DK	2014	44%
Study summary Full title Comparative analysis of discrete exosome fractions obtained by differential centrifugation All authors Jeppesen DK, Hvam ML, Primdahl-Bengtson B, Boysen AT, Whitehead B, Dyrskjøt L, Orntoft TF, Howard KA, Ostenfeld MS Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ i (show more...)BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ in size, density and composition. The standard isolation method for exosomes is centrifugation of fluid samples, typically at 100,000×g or above. Knowledge of the effect of discrete ultracentrifugation speeds on the purification from different cell types, however, is limited. METHODS: We examined the effect of applying differential centrifugation g-forces ranging from 33,000×g to 200,000×g on exosome yield and purity, using 2 unrelated human cell lines, embryonic kidney HEK293 cells and bladder carcinoma FL3 cells. The fractions were evaluated by nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), total protein quantification and immunoblotting for CD81, TSG101, syntenin, VDAC1 and calreticulin. RESULTS: NTA revealed the lowest background particle count in Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium media devoid of phenol red and cleared by 200,000×g overnight centrifugation. The centrifugation tube fill level impacted the sedimentation efficacy. Comparative analysis by NTA, protein quantification, and detection of exosomal and contamination markers identified differences in vesicle size, concentration and composition of the obtained fractions. In addition, HEK293 and FL3 vesicles displayed marked differences in sedimentation characteristics. Exosomes were pelleted already at 33,000×g, a g-force which also removed most contaminating microsomes. Optimal vesicle-to-protein yield was obtained at 67,000×g for HEK293 cells but 100,000×g for FL3 cells. Relative expression of exosomal markers (TSG101, CD81, syntenin) suggested presence of exosome subpopulations with variable sedimentation characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Specific g-force/k factor usage during differential centrifugation greatly influences the purity and yield of exosomes. The vesicle sedimentation profile differed between the 2 cell lines. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (84th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type) Reported Not reported Not applicable EV-enriched proteins Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins non EV-enriched protein Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein qualitative and quantitative analysis Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected. electron microscopy images Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image density gradient Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs EV density Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density ultracentrifugation specifics Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps antibody specifics Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution lysate preparation Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition Study data Sample type Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes Separation protocol Separation protocol Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the different steps of the separation protocol. dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography IAF = immuno-affinity capture (d)(U)C Adj. k-factor 93.96 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: CD81/ TSG101/ Syntenin non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Equal to or above 150,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 90 Pelleting: rotor type 70Ti Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 93.96 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins CD81/ Syntenin/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NTA

	EV140029	6/12	Homo sapiens	NAY	(d)(U)C	Jeppesen DK	2014	44%
Study summary Full title Comparative analysis of discrete exosome fractions obtained by differential centrifugation All authors Jeppesen DK, Hvam ML, Primdahl-Bengtson B, Boysen AT, Whitehead B, Dyrskjøt L, Orntoft TF, Howard KA, Ostenfeld MS Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ i (show more...)BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ in size, density and composition. The standard isolation method for exosomes is centrifugation of fluid samples, typically at 100,000×g or above. Knowledge of the effect of discrete ultracentrifugation speeds on the purification from different cell types, however, is limited. METHODS: We examined the effect of applying differential centrifugation g-forces ranging from 33,000×g to 200,000×g on exosome yield and purity, using 2 unrelated human cell lines, embryonic kidney HEK293 cells and bladder carcinoma FL3 cells. The fractions were evaluated by nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), total protein quantification and immunoblotting for CD81, TSG101, syntenin, VDAC1 and calreticulin. RESULTS: NTA revealed the lowest background particle count in Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium media devoid of phenol red and cleared by 200,000×g overnight centrifugation. The centrifugation tube fill level impacted the sedimentation efficacy. Comparative analysis by NTA, protein quantification, and detection of exosomal and contamination markers identified differences in vesicle size, concentration and composition of the obtained fractions. In addition, HEK293 and FL3 vesicles displayed marked differences in sedimentation characteristics. Exosomes were pelleted already at 33,000×g, a g-force which also removed most contaminating microsomes. Optimal vesicle-to-protein yield was obtained at 67,000×g for HEK293 cells but 100,000×g for FL3 cells. Relative expression of exosomal markers (TSG101, CD81, syntenin) suggested presence of exosome subpopulations with variable sedimentation characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Specific g-force/k factor usage during differential centrifugation greatly influences the purity and yield of exosomes. The vesicle sedimentation profile differed between the 2 cell lines. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (84th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type) Reported Not reported Not applicable EV-enriched proteins Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins non EV-enriched protein Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein qualitative and quantitative analysis Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected. electron microscopy images Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image density gradient Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs EV density Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density ultracentrifugation specifics Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps antibody specifics Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution lysate preparation Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition Study data Sample type Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes Separation protocol Separation protocol Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the different steps of the separation protocol. dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography IAF = immuno-affinity capture (d)(U)C Adj. k-factor 78.45 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: CD81/ TSG101/ Syntenin non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Equal to or above 150,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 90 Pelleting: rotor type 70Ti Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 78.45 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins CD81/ Syntenin/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NTA

	EV140029	7/12	Homo sapiens	NAY	(d)(U)C	Jeppesen DK	2014	44%
Study summary Full title Comparative analysis of discrete exosome fractions obtained by differential centrifugation All authors Jeppesen DK, Hvam ML, Primdahl-Bengtson B, Boysen AT, Whitehead B, Dyrskjøt L, Orntoft TF, Howard KA, Ostenfeld MS Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ i (show more...)BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ in size, density and composition. The standard isolation method for exosomes is centrifugation of fluid samples, typically at 100,000×g or above. Knowledge of the effect of discrete ultracentrifugation speeds on the purification from different cell types, however, is limited. METHODS: We examined the effect of applying differential centrifugation g-forces ranging from 33,000×g to 200,000×g on exosome yield and purity, using 2 unrelated human cell lines, embryonic kidney HEK293 cells and bladder carcinoma FL3 cells. The fractions were evaluated by nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), total protein quantification and immunoblotting for CD81, TSG101, syntenin, VDAC1 and calreticulin. RESULTS: NTA revealed the lowest background particle count in Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium media devoid of phenol red and cleared by 200,000×g overnight centrifugation. The centrifugation tube fill level impacted the sedimentation efficacy. Comparative analysis by NTA, protein quantification, and detection of exosomal and contamination markers identified differences in vesicle size, concentration and composition of the obtained fractions. In addition, HEK293 and FL3 vesicles displayed marked differences in sedimentation characteristics. Exosomes were pelleted already at 33,000×g, a g-force which also removed most contaminating microsomes. Optimal vesicle-to-protein yield was obtained at 67,000×g for HEK293 cells but 100,000×g for FL3 cells. Relative expression of exosomal markers (TSG101, CD81, syntenin) suggested presence of exosome subpopulations with variable sedimentation characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Specific g-force/k factor usage during differential centrifugation greatly influences the purity and yield of exosomes. The vesicle sedimentation profile differed between the 2 cell lines. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (84th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type) Reported Not reported Not applicable EV-enriched proteins Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins non EV-enriched protein Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein qualitative and quantitative analysis Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected. electron microscopy images Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image density gradient Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs EV density Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density ultracentrifugation specifics Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps antibody specifics Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution lysate preparation Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition Study data Sample type Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes Separation protocol Separation protocol Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the different steps of the separation protocol. dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography IAF = immuno-affinity capture (d)(U)C Adj. k-factor 475.5 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: CD81/ TSG101/ Syntenin non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 90 Pelleting: rotor type 70Ti Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 475.5 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins CD81/ Syntenin/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NTA

	EV140029	8/12	Homo sapiens	NAY	(d)(U)C	Jeppesen DK	2014	44%
Study summary Full title Comparative analysis of discrete exosome fractions obtained by differential centrifugation All authors Jeppesen DK, Hvam ML, Primdahl-Bengtson B, Boysen AT, Whitehead B, Dyrskjøt L, Orntoft TF, Howard KA, Ostenfeld MS Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ i (show more...)BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ in size, density and composition. The standard isolation method for exosomes is centrifugation of fluid samples, typically at 100,000×g or above. Knowledge of the effect of discrete ultracentrifugation speeds on the purification from different cell types, however, is limited. METHODS: We examined the effect of applying differential centrifugation g-forces ranging from 33,000×g to 200,000×g on exosome yield and purity, using 2 unrelated human cell lines, embryonic kidney HEK293 cells and bladder carcinoma FL3 cells. The fractions were evaluated by nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), total protein quantification and immunoblotting for CD81, TSG101, syntenin, VDAC1 and calreticulin. RESULTS: NTA revealed the lowest background particle count in Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium media devoid of phenol red and cleared by 200,000×g overnight centrifugation. The centrifugation tube fill level impacted the sedimentation efficacy. Comparative analysis by NTA, protein quantification, and detection of exosomal and contamination markers identified differences in vesicle size, concentration and composition of the obtained fractions. In addition, HEK293 and FL3 vesicles displayed marked differences in sedimentation characteristics. Exosomes were pelleted already at 33,000×g, a g-force which also removed most contaminating microsomes. Optimal vesicle-to-protein yield was obtained at 67,000×g for HEK293 cells but 100,000×g for FL3 cells. Relative expression of exosomal markers (TSG101, CD81, syntenin) suggested presence of exosome subpopulations with variable sedimentation characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Specific g-force/k factor usage during differential centrifugation greatly influences the purity and yield of exosomes. The vesicle sedimentation profile differed between the 2 cell lines. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (84th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type) Reported Not reported Not applicable EV-enriched proteins Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins non EV-enriched protein Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein qualitative and quantitative analysis Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected. electron microscopy images Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image density gradient Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs EV density Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density ultracentrifugation specifics Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps antibody specifics Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution lysate preparation Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition Study data Sample type Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes Separation protocol Separation protocol Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the different steps of the separation protocol. dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography IAF = immuno-affinity capture (d)(U)C Adj. k-factor 234.2 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: CD81/ TSG101/ Syntenin non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 50,000 g and 100,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 90 Pelleting: rotor type 70Ti Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 234.2 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins CD81/ Syntenin/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NTA

	EV140029	9/12	Homo sapiens	NAY	(d)(U)C	Jeppesen DK	2014	44%
Study summary Full title Comparative analysis of discrete exosome fractions obtained by differential centrifugation All authors Jeppesen DK, Hvam ML, Primdahl-Bengtson B, Boysen AT, Whitehead B, Dyrskjøt L, Orntoft TF, Howard KA, Ostenfeld MS Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ i (show more...)BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ in size, density and composition. The standard isolation method for exosomes is centrifugation of fluid samples, typically at 100,000×g or above. Knowledge of the effect of discrete ultracentrifugation speeds on the purification from different cell types, however, is limited. METHODS: We examined the effect of applying differential centrifugation g-forces ranging from 33,000×g to 200,000×g on exosome yield and purity, using 2 unrelated human cell lines, embryonic kidney HEK293 cells and bladder carcinoma FL3 cells. The fractions were evaluated by nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), total protein quantification and immunoblotting for CD81, TSG101, syntenin, VDAC1 and calreticulin. RESULTS: NTA revealed the lowest background particle count in Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium media devoid of phenol red and cleared by 200,000×g overnight centrifugation. The centrifugation tube fill level impacted the sedimentation efficacy. Comparative analysis by NTA, protein quantification, and detection of exosomal and contamination markers identified differences in vesicle size, concentration and composition of the obtained fractions. In addition, HEK293 and FL3 vesicles displayed marked differences in sedimentation characteristics. Exosomes were pelleted already at 33,000×g, a g-force which also removed most contaminating microsomes. Optimal vesicle-to-protein yield was obtained at 67,000×g for HEK293 cells but 100,000×g for FL3 cells. Relative expression of exosomal markers (TSG101, CD81, syntenin) suggested presence of exosome subpopulations with variable sedimentation characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Specific g-force/k factor usage during differential centrifugation greatly influences the purity and yield of exosomes. The vesicle sedimentation profile differed between the 2 cell lines. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (84th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type) Reported Not reported Not applicable EV-enriched proteins Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins non EV-enriched protein Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein qualitative and quantitative analysis Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected. electron microscopy images Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image density gradient Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs EV density Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density ultracentrifugation specifics Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps antibody specifics Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution lysate preparation Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition Study data Sample type Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes Separation protocol Separation protocol Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the different steps of the separation protocol. dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography IAF = immuno-affinity capture (d)(U)C Adj. k-factor 156.9 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: CD81/ TSG101/ Syntenin non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Between 50,000 g and 100,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 90 Pelleting: rotor type 70Ti Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 156.9 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins CD81/ Syntenin/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NTA

	EV140029	10/12	Homo sapiens	NAY	(d)(U)C	Jeppesen DK	2014	44%
Study summary Full title Comparative analysis of discrete exosome fractions obtained by differential centrifugation All authors Jeppesen DK, Hvam ML, Primdahl-Bengtson B, Boysen AT, Whitehead B, Dyrskjøt L, Orntoft TF, Howard KA, Ostenfeld MS Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ i (show more...)BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ in size, density and composition. The standard isolation method for exosomes is centrifugation of fluid samples, typically at 100,000×g or above. Knowledge of the effect of discrete ultracentrifugation speeds on the purification from different cell types, however, is limited. METHODS: We examined the effect of applying differential centrifugation g-forces ranging from 33,000×g to 200,000×g on exosome yield and purity, using 2 unrelated human cell lines, embryonic kidney HEK293 cells and bladder carcinoma FL3 cells. The fractions were evaluated by nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), total protein quantification and immunoblotting for CD81, TSG101, syntenin, VDAC1 and calreticulin. RESULTS: NTA revealed the lowest background particle count in Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium media devoid of phenol red and cleared by 200,000×g overnight centrifugation. The centrifugation tube fill level impacted the sedimentation efficacy. Comparative analysis by NTA, protein quantification, and detection of exosomal and contamination markers identified differences in vesicle size, concentration and composition of the obtained fractions. In addition, HEK293 and FL3 vesicles displayed marked differences in sedimentation characteristics. Exosomes were pelleted already at 33,000×g, a g-force which also removed most contaminating microsomes. Optimal vesicle-to-protein yield was obtained at 67,000×g for HEK293 cells but 100,000×g for FL3 cells. Relative expression of exosomal markers (TSG101, CD81, syntenin) suggested presence of exosome subpopulations with variable sedimentation characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Specific g-force/k factor usage during differential centrifugation greatly influences the purity and yield of exosomes. The vesicle sedimentation profile differed between the 2 cell lines. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (84th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type) Reported Not reported Not applicable EV-enriched proteins Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins non EV-enriched protein Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein qualitative and quantitative analysis Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected. electron microscopy images Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image density gradient Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs EV density Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density ultracentrifugation specifics Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps antibody specifics Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution lysate preparation Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition Study data Sample type Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes Separation protocol Separation protocol Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the different steps of the separation protocol. dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography IAF = immuno-affinity capture (d)(U)C Adj. k-factor 117.9 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: CD81/ TSG101/ Syntenin non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Between 50,000 g and 100,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 90 Pelleting: rotor type 70Ti Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 117.9 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins CD81/ Syntenin/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NTA

	EV140029	11/12	Homo sapiens	NAY	(d)(U)C	Jeppesen DK	2014	44%
Study summary Full title Comparative analysis of discrete exosome fractions obtained by differential centrifugation All authors Jeppesen DK, Hvam ML, Primdahl-Bengtson B, Boysen AT, Whitehead B, Dyrskjøt L, Orntoft TF, Howard KA, Ostenfeld MS Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ i (show more...)BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ in size, density and composition. The standard isolation method for exosomes is centrifugation of fluid samples, typically at 100,000×g or above. Knowledge of the effect of discrete ultracentrifugation speeds on the purification from different cell types, however, is limited. METHODS: We examined the effect of applying differential centrifugation g-forces ranging from 33,000×g to 200,000×g on exosome yield and purity, using 2 unrelated human cell lines, embryonic kidney HEK293 cells and bladder carcinoma FL3 cells. The fractions were evaluated by nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), total protein quantification and immunoblotting for CD81, TSG101, syntenin, VDAC1 and calreticulin. RESULTS: NTA revealed the lowest background particle count in Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium media devoid of phenol red and cleared by 200,000×g overnight centrifugation. The centrifugation tube fill level impacted the sedimentation efficacy. Comparative analysis by NTA, protein quantification, and detection of exosomal and contamination markers identified differences in vesicle size, concentration and composition of the obtained fractions. In addition, HEK293 and FL3 vesicles displayed marked differences in sedimentation characteristics. Exosomes were pelleted already at 33,000×g, a g-force which also removed most contaminating microsomes. Optimal vesicle-to-protein yield was obtained at 67,000×g for HEK293 cells but 100,000×g for FL3 cells. Relative expression of exosomal markers (TSG101, CD81, syntenin) suggested presence of exosome subpopulations with variable sedimentation characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Specific g-force/k factor usage during differential centrifugation greatly influences the purity and yield of exosomes. The vesicle sedimentation profile differed between the 2 cell lines. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (84th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type) Reported Not reported Not applicable EV-enriched proteins Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins non EV-enriched protein Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein qualitative and quantitative analysis Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected. electron microscopy images Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image density gradient Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs EV density Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density ultracentrifugation specifics Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps antibody specifics Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution lysate preparation Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition Study data Sample type Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes Separation protocol Separation protocol Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the different steps of the separation protocol. dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography IAF = immuno-affinity capture (d)(U)C Adj. k-factor 93.96 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: CD81/ TSG101/ Syntenin non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Equal to or above 150,000 g Between 50,000 g and 100,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 90 Pelleting: rotor type 70Ti Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 93.96 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins CD81/ Syntenin/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NTA

	EV140029	12/12	Homo sapiens	NAY	(d)(U)C	Jeppesen DK	2014	44%
Study summary Full title Comparative analysis of discrete exosome fractions obtained by differential centrifugation All authors Jeppesen DK, Hvam ML, Primdahl-Bengtson B, Boysen AT, Whitehead B, Dyrskjøt L, Orntoft TF, Howard KA, Ostenfeld MS Journal J Extracell Vesicles Abstract BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ i (show more...)BACKGROUND: Cells release a mixture of extracellular vesicles, amongst these exosomes, that differ in size, density and composition. The standard isolation method for exosomes is centrifugation of fluid samples, typically at 100,000×g or above. Knowledge of the effect of discrete ultracentrifugation speeds on the purification from different cell types, however, is limited. METHODS: We examined the effect of applying differential centrifugation g-forces ranging from 33,000×g to 200,000×g on exosome yield and purity, using 2 unrelated human cell lines, embryonic kidney HEK293 cells and bladder carcinoma FL3 cells. The fractions were evaluated by nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA), total protein quantification and immunoblotting for CD81, TSG101, syntenin, VDAC1 and calreticulin. RESULTS: NTA revealed the lowest background particle count in Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium media devoid of phenol red and cleared by 200,000×g overnight centrifugation. The centrifugation tube fill level impacted the sedimentation efficacy. Comparative analysis by NTA, protein quantification, and detection of exosomal and contamination markers identified differences in vesicle size, concentration and composition of the obtained fractions. In addition, HEK293 and FL3 vesicles displayed marked differences in sedimentation characteristics. Exosomes were pelleted already at 33,000×g, a g-force which also removed most contaminating microsomes. Optimal vesicle-to-protein yield was obtained at 67,000×g for HEK293 cells but 100,000×g for FL3 cells. Relative expression of exosomal markers (TSG101, CD81, syntenin) suggested presence of exosome subpopulations with variable sedimentation characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Specific g-force/k factor usage during differential centrifugation greatly influences the purity and yield of exosomes. The vesicle sedimentation profile differed between the 2 cell lines. (hide) EV-METRIC 44% (84th percentile of all experiments on the same sample type) Reported Not reported Not applicable EV-enriched proteins Protein analysis: analysis of three or more EV-enriched proteins non EV-enriched protein Protein analysis: assessment of a non-EV-enriched protein qualitative and quantitative analysis Particle analysis: implementation of both qualitative and quantitative methods. For the quantitative method, the reporting of measured EV concentration is expected. electron microscopy images Particle analysis: inclusion of a widefield and close-up electron microscopy image density gradient Separation method: density gradient, at least as validation of results attributed to EVs EV density Separation method: reporting of obtained EV density ultracentrifugation specifics Separation method: reporting of g-forces, duration and rotor type of ultracentrifugation steps antibody specifics Protein analysis: antibody clone/reference number and dilution lysate preparation Protein analysis: lysis buffer composition Study data Sample type Cell culture supernatant Sample origin NAY Focus vesicles exosomes Separation protocol Separation protocol Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the different steps of the separation protocol. dUC = (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation DG = density gradient UF = ultrafiltration SEC = size-exclusion chromatography IAF = immuno-affinity capture (d)(U)C Adj. k-factor 78.45 (pelleting) Protein markers EV: CD81/ TSG101/ Syntenin non-EV: Cell organelle protein Proteomics no Show all info Study aim Technical Sample Species Homo sapiens Sample Type Cell culture supernatant EV-harvesting Medium EV Depleted Separation Method (Differential) (ultra)centrifugation dUC: centrifugation steps Below or equal to 800 g Between 800 g and 10,000 g Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g Equal to or above 150,000 g Between 50,000 g and 100,000 g Pelleting performed Yes Pelleting: time(min) 90 Pelleting: rotor type 70Ti Pelleting: adjusted k-factor 78.45 Characterization: Protein analysis Western Blot Antibody details provided? No Detected EV-associated proteins CD81/ Syntenin/ TSG101 Detected contaminants Cell organelle protein Characterization: Particle analysis NTA

				1 - 12 of 12

EV-TRACK ID	EV140029
species	Homo sapiens
sample type	Cell culture
cell type	NAY
condition	NAY
separation protocol	(d)(U)C	(d)(U)C	(d)(U)C	(d)(U)C	(d)(U)C	(d)(U)C	(d)(U)C	(d)(U)C	(d)(U)C	(d)(U)C	(d)(U)C	(d)(U)C
Exp. nr.	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12
EV-METRIC %	44	44	44	44	44	44	44	44	44	44	44	44

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data

Study summary

Study data