Search > Results

You searched for: EV180079 (EV-TRACK ID)

Showing 1 - 2 of 2

Experiment number
  • If needed, multiple experiments were identified in a single publication based on differing sample types, separation protocols and/or vesicle types of interest.
Species
  • Species of origin of the EVs.
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the different steps of the separation protocol.
    • (d)(U)C = (differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
Details EV-TRACK ID Experiment nr. Species Sample type separation protocol First author Year EV-METRIC
EV180079 1/2 Mus musculus Cell culture supernatant (d)(U)C Lucia Paolini 2020 67%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Lucia Paolini, Stefania Federici, Giovanni Consoli, Diletta Arceri, Annalisa Radeghieri, Ivano Alessandri, Paolo Bergese
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Identification of extracellular vesicle (EV) subpopulations remains an open challenge. To date, the (show more...)Identification of extracellular vesicle (EV) subpopulations remains an open challenge. To date, the common strategy is based on searching and probing set of molecular components and physical properties intended to be univocally characteristics of the target subpopulation. Pitfalls include the risk to opt for an unsuitable marker set - which may either not represent the subpopulation or also cover other unintended subpopulations - and the need to use different characterization techniques and equipment. This approach focused on specific markers may result inadequate to routinely deal with EV subpopulations that have an intrinsic high level of heterogeneity. In this paper, we show that Fourier-transform Infrared (FT-IR) spectroscopy can provide a collective fingerprint of EV subpopulations in one single experiment. FT-IR measurements were performed on large (LEVs, ~600 nm), medium (MEVs, ~200 nm) and small (SEVs ~60 nm) EVs enriched from two different cell lines medium: murine prostate cancer (TRAMP-C2) and skin melanoma (B16). Spectral regions between 3100-2800 cm-1 and 1880-900 cm-1, corresponding to functional groups mainly ascribed to lipid and protein contributions, were acquired and processed by Principal Component Analysis (PCA). LEVs, MEVs and SEVs were separately grouped for both the considered cell lines. Moreover, subpopulations of the same size but from different sources were assigned (with different degrees of accuracy) to two different groups. These findings demonstrate that FT-IR has the potential to quickly fingerprint EV subpopulations as a whole, suggesting an appealing complement/alternative for their characterization and grading, extendable to healthy and pathological EVs and fully artificial nanovesicles. (hide)
EV-METRIC
67% (92nd 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
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
Cell Name
TRAMP-C2
Sample origin
Control condition
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • (d)(U)C = (differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(d)(U)C
Protein markers
EV: ADAM10/ Annexin V/ Flotillin1/ CD81
non-EV: GM130
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Mus musculus
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample Condition
Control condition
EV-producing cells
TRAMP-C2
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum free medium
Separation Method
Differential ultracentrifugation
centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Obtain an EV pellet :
Yes
Pelleting: time(min)
240
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 45 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
TLA-55
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Colorimetric Nanoplasmonic Assay
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
Flotillin1/ Annexin V/ ADAM10/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
GM130
Characterization: Lipid analysis
Yes
EM
EM-type
Atomic force-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
large EVs 570 nm, medium EVS 190 nm, Small EVs 70 nm
EV180079 2/2 Mus musculus Cell culture supernatant (d)(U)C Lucia Paolini 2020 67%

Study summary

Full title
All authors
Lucia Paolini, Stefania Federici, Giovanni Consoli, Diletta Arceri, Annalisa Radeghieri, Ivano Alessandri, Paolo Bergese
Journal
J Extracell Vesicles
Abstract
Identification of extracellular vesicle (EV) subpopulations remains an open challenge. To date, the (show more...)Identification of extracellular vesicle (EV) subpopulations remains an open challenge. To date, the common strategy is based on searching and probing set of molecular components and physical properties intended to be univocally characteristics of the target subpopulation. Pitfalls include the risk to opt for an unsuitable marker set - which may either not represent the subpopulation or also cover other unintended subpopulations - and the need to use different characterization techniques and equipment. This approach focused on specific markers may result inadequate to routinely deal with EV subpopulations that have an intrinsic high level of heterogeneity. In this paper, we show that Fourier-transform Infrared (FT-IR) spectroscopy can provide a collective fingerprint of EV subpopulations in one single experiment. FT-IR measurements were performed on large (LEVs, ~600 nm), medium (MEVs, ~200 nm) and small (SEVs ~60 nm) EVs enriched from two different cell lines medium: murine prostate cancer (TRAMP-C2) and skin melanoma (B16). Spectral regions between 3100-2800 cm-1 and 1880-900 cm-1, corresponding to functional groups mainly ascribed to lipid and protein contributions, were acquired and processed by Principal Component Analysis (PCA). LEVs, MEVs and SEVs were separately grouped for both the considered cell lines. Moreover, subpopulations of the same size but from different sources were assigned (with different degrees of accuracy) to two different groups. These findings demonstrate that FT-IR has the potential to quickly fingerprint EV subpopulations as a whole, suggesting an appealing complement/alternative for their characterization and grading, extendable to healthy and pathological EVs and fully artificial nanovesicles. (hide)
EV-METRIC
67% (92nd 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
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
Cell Name
B16
Sample origin
Control condition
Focus vesicles
extracellular vesicle
Separation protocol
Separation protocol
  • Gives a short, non-chronological overview of the
    different steps of the separation protocol.
    • (d)(U)C = (differential) (ultra)centrifugation
    • DG = density gradient
    • UF = ultrafiltration
    • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
    • IAF = immuno-affinity capture
(d)(U)C
Protein markers
EV: ADAM10/ Annexin V/ Flotillin1/ CD81
non-EV: GM130
Proteomics
no
Show all info
Study aim
Identification of content (omics approaches)
Sample
Species
Mus musculus
Sample Type
Cell culture supernatant
Sample Condition
Control condition
EV-producing cells
B16
EV-harvesting Medium
Serum free medium
Separation Method
Differential ultracentrifugation
centrifugation steps
Below or equal to 800 g
Between 10,000 g and 50,000 g
Between 100,000 g and 150,000 g
Obtain an EV pellet :
Yes
Pelleting: time(min)
240
Pelleting: rotor type
Type 45 Ti
Pelleting: speed (g)
100000
Wash: volume per pellet (ml)
1
Wash: time (min)
120
Wash: Rotor Type
TLA-55
Wash: speed (g)
100000
Characterization: Protein analysis
Protein Concentration Method
Colorimetric Nanoplasmonic assay
Western Blot
Detected EV-associated proteins
Flotillin1/ Annexin V/ ADAM10/ CD81
Not detected contaminants
GM130
Characterization: Lipid analysis
Yes
EM
EM-type
Atomic force-EM
Image type
Close-up, Wide-field
Report size (nm)
large EVS 690 nm, medium Evs 230 nm, small Evs 50 nm
1 - 2 of 2
  • CM = Commercial method
  • dUC = differential ultracentrifugation
  • DG = density gradient
  • UF = ultrafiltration
  • SEC = size-exclusion chromatography
EV-TRACK ID
EV180079
species
Mus musculus
sample type
Cell culture
cell type
TRAMP-C2
B16
condition
Control condition
Control condition
separation protocol
(d)(U)C
(d)(U)C
Exp. nr.
1
2
EV-METRIC %
67
67