Figure 6
Figure 6. Reduced VWF adhesion force on TSP2 KO derived ECM as measured by AFM. A VWF-conjugated 2-μm bead affixed to the end of an AFM cantilever was used to perform adhesion force studies. These studies were performed on decellularized day 7 ECM from WT and TSP2 KO DFs after BSA treatment, as well as on untreated plastic, collagen, TSP1, and TSP2-coated plastic, and BSA-treated tissue-culture plastic controls. Representative AFM approach and retract curves for adhesion of VWF-coated bead to WT ECM (A), where there is significant adhesion (denoted by the downward spike in the retract curve) and TSP2 KO ECM (B), where there is no visible adhesion. Quantification of the adhesion force was performed using NanoScope Analysis software and showed reduced VWF adhesion on the TSP2 KO ECM compared with WT ECM (C) and no adhesion of VWF to pure TSP2 compared with collagen I and TSP1 (D). n = 5; *P < .05; #P < .0001.

Reduced VWF adhesion force on TSP2 KO derived ECM as measured by AFM. A VWF-conjugated 2-μm bead affixed to the end of an AFM cantilever was used to perform adhesion force studies. These studies were performed on decellularized day 7 ECM from WT and TSP2 KO DFs after BSA treatment, as well as on untreated plastic, collagen, TSP1, and TSP2-coated plastic, and BSA-treated tissue-culture plastic controls. Representative AFM approach and retract curves for adhesion of VWF-coated bead to WT ECM (A), where there is significant adhesion (denoted by the downward spike in the retract curve) and TSP2 KO ECM (B), where there is no visible adhesion. Quantification of the adhesion force was performed using NanoScope Analysis software and showed reduced VWF adhesion on the TSP2 KO ECM compared with WT ECM (C) and no adhesion of VWF to pure TSP2 compared with collagen I and TSP1 (D). n = 5; *P < .05; #P < .0001.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal