Meanwhile, 1% BSA was added to the staining solution to reduce nonspecific
background staining. The cells were washed with 0.05% PBS-Tween20 three times before microscopic observation. Microscopy and image analysis The fluorescence images of cells were observed by a laser scanning confocal microscope (FV-300, IX71; Olympus, Tokyo, Japan) using a 488-nm continuous wave Ar+ laser (Melles Griot, Carlsbad, CA, USA) as the excitation source and a × 60 water objective to focus the laser beam. A 505- to XAV-939 in vivo 550-nm bandpass filter was used for the fluorescence images. Each experiment was repeated three times independently. The fluorescence intensities of MMP, Ca2+, and NO probes from the microscopic images were analyzed with the Olympus Fluoview software. The data were expressed in terms of the relative fluorescence intensity Volasertib cost of the probes and expressed as mean ± SD. The fluorescence intensity was averaged from 100 to 150 cells for each experiment. Results and discussion Generation of ROS by pure and N-doped TiO2 in aqueous suspensions
The generations of ROS induced by TiO2 or N-TiO2 nanoparticles in aqueous suspensions under visible light irradiation were studied using the fluorescence probes as described in the ‘Methods’ section. The fluorescence intensities with the irradiation GSK621 order times ranging from 1 to 5 min were shown in Figure 1a. The fluorescence intensities
Cytoskeletal Signaling inhibitor of both TiO2 (the black line) and N-TiO2 (the red line) samples increased with irradiation time but the fluorescence intensities of N-TiO2 samples were always higher than that of the TiO2 ones. It means that N-TiO2 could generate more ROS than TiO2 under visible light irradiation, which agrees well with the spectral result that N-TiO2 showed higher visible light absorption than TiO2 (see Additional file 1: Figure S1, where a shoulder was observed at the edge of the absorption spectra, which extended the absorption of N-TiO2 from 380 to 550 nm). Figure 1 Comparison of ROS induced by TiO 2 and N-TiO 2 . Fluorescence measurements as a function of irradiation time to compare the productions of ROS and specific ROS in aqueous suspensions induced by TiO2 and N-TiO2: (a) total ROS, (b) O2 ·−/H2O2, and (c) OH · . The major reactions for the formation of ROS upon illumination of TiO2 have been proposed as follows [25]: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) OH · is mainly formed in the reaction of photogenerated holes with surrounding water, while O2 ·− is formed in the reaction of photogenerated electrons with dissolved oxygen molecules. Some O2 ·− can form 1O2 by reacting with the holes. Moreover, some OH · can form H2O2, and the reactions of H2O2 can also result in the formation of OH · with a lesser extent. Since DCFH is a nonspecific ROS probe, it is necessary to further analyze the specific ROS.