Mouse neuronal cells cultured on multi-electrode arrays display an increase in response following electrical stimulation. This protocol demonstrates how to culture neurons, how to record activity, and how to establish a protocol to train the networks to respond to patterns of stimulation.
Micro-electrode arrays (MEAs) can be used to investigate drug toxicity, design paradigms for next-generation personalized medicine, and study network dynamics in neuronal cultures. In contrast with more traditional methods, such as patch-clamping, which can only record activity from a single cell, MEAs can record simultaneously from multiple sites in a network, without requiring the arduous task of placing each electrode individually. Moreover, numerous control and stimulation configurations can be easily applied within the same experimental setup, allowing for a broad range of dynamics to be explored. One of the key dynamics of interest in these in vitro studies has been the extent to which cultured networks display properties indicative of learning. Mouse neuronal cells cultured on MEAs display an increase in response following training induced by electrical stimulation. This protocol demonstrates how to culture neuronal cells on MEAs; successfully record from over 95% of the plated dishes; establish a protocol to train the networks to respond to patterns of stimulation; and sort, plot, and interpret the results from such experiments. The use of a proprietary system for stimulating and recording neuronal cultures is demonstrated. Software packages are also used to sort neuronal units. A custom-designed graphical user interface is used to visualize post-stimulus time histograms, inter-burst intervals, and burst duration, as well as to compare the cellular response to stimulation before and after a training protocol. Finally, representative results and future directions of this research effort are discussed.
Micro-electrode arrays (MEAs) can be used to investigate drug toxicity, design paradigms for next-generation personalized medicine, and study network dynamics in neuronal cultures1. In contrast to more traditional methods-such as patch-clamping, which can only record activity from a single cell, or field recording with a glass pipette, which can record extracellular responses from the neurons surrounding the electrode at a single site-MEAs can simultaneously record from multiple sites in a cell culture without requiring the arduous task of placing each electrode individually. This allows for the study of the dynamic interactions between groups of cells that form a network within that culture. Moreover, the effects of electrical stimulation on network firing patterns2,3,4,5 and network control6 in neuronal cultures have been well documented, and numerous configurations of electrical stimulation and controls can be easily applied within the same experimental setup, allowing for a broad range of spatio-temporal dynamics to be explored.
One of the key dynamics of interest in these in vitro studies has been the extent to which cultured networks display properties indicative of learning7,8,9,10,11,12,13. The Peixoto Lab previously examined the effects of high-frequency training signals, as described in Ruaro et al.14, on networks of mouse neurons plated on microelectrode arrays15. In these experiments, networks displayed an increase in response following training induced by electrical stimulation. The increased response was considered a form of learning via stimulus recognition, whereby the networks responded in a consistent manner to a change in stimulus after the application of a specific stimulation (i.e., training) protocol.
This protocol demonstrates how to culture neuronal cells on MEAs, successfully record from over 95% of the plated dishes, establish a protocol to train the networks to respond to patterns of stimulation, sort single-unit activity, plot histograms, and interpret the results from such experiments. The use of a proprietary system (see the Table of Materials) for the stimulation and recording of neuronal cultures is demonstrated, as well as the application of software packages (see the Table of Materials) to sort neuronal units. A custom-designed graphical user interface (see the Table of Materials) is used to visualize post-stimulus time histograms, inter-burst intervals, and burst duration, as well as to compare the cellular response to stimulation before and after a training protocol.
All animal procedures follow the NIH guidelines and/or the Public Health Services Policy on the Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and are under an institutionally approved animal care and use (IACUC) protocol at George Mason University.
1. Material Preparation
2. Array/Dish Preparation
NOTE: The MEAs used in the procedure are 60-channel arrays organized in an 8 x 8 square. The interelectrode distance is 200 µm, and each electrode is 10 µm in diameter. The conducting material for the tracks is titanium, and the electrodes themselves are made of TiN. The glass ring around the electrodes is 6 mm high, with a 24 mm outer diameter. A cap made from polyoxymethylene (POM) is used to cover the MEA, and a gas-permeable/liquid-impermeable fluorinated ethylene propylene (FEP) film is used to prevent contamination during recording and stimulation sessions.
3. Embryo Removal and Brain Extraction
4. Frontal Cortex Removal
5. Cell Dissociation
6. Plating Cells
7. Maintaining the Cultures
8. Visual Inspections and Recording
9. Training Networks
NOTE: Figure 6 shows an overview of steps 9.1-9.3, described below.
10. Data Analysis
Note: The data files are saved and later sorted into neuronal units using a proprietary sorting software (see the table of materials). A customized graphical user interface (GUI) is used to load the units and analyze patterns of activity in the cultures, inter-burst intervals, burst duration, and post-stimulus time histogram (PSTH) (see the table of materials). The PSTH is the most important graph to be analyzed, as it displays the activity of the network in bin sizes (of variable length), thus providing a visual representation of the response of the network to the stimulation presented.
Using the procedure presented here (Figure 11), 60-channel MEAs plated with E17 mouse neuronal cells were incubated until the cultures covered the arrays in a healthy carpet of cells (Figure 12 and Figure 3a). After 3 weeks of incubation at 10% CO2 and 37 °C, the cultures were checked for spontaneous activity using a commercial recording system (see Materials Table). The temperature was maintained at 37 °C during the recording procedure using a temperature controller, since temperature affects neuronal activity and firing rates.
Testing for activity
Spontaneously active networks normally exhibit varying signal patterns. An average active culture can register activity in approximately 40% of the electrodes. Of these active electrode sites, nearly half register spontaneous signals, with firing rates ranging from 5 – 10 Hz. A representative raster plot of spontaneous activity is shown in Figure 4a. The tick marks indicate the timestamps of action potentials recorded from 9 active electrodes during a 20 s window, at an acquisition rate of 25 kHz and a bandpass filter range between 300 Hz and 3 kHz. Figure 4b shows the baseline noise and the filtered raw extracellular signal during 8 bursts of activity before the sorting procedure. To separate the action potentials from the noise, thresholds for each channel are set to 5 times the standard deviation of the baseline noise and are calculated over a 500 ms window15.
Prior to analysis, recorded spikes for each electrode were sorted offline to distinguish between physiological activity and stimulation artifacts using a k-means algorithm and principle component analysis. Signals that had been identified as physiological responses were grouped together to create a population response at each electrode (Figure 13 and Figure 9)15.
Training neural networks with electrical stimulation
Networks were trained using electrical stimulation applied to the culture directly through the MEA electrodes using a stimulus generator (see the table of materials). In this set of representative results, an "L"-shaped configuration consisting of 13 electrodes was used (Figure 8), although many other configurations can be applied. The probing and training stimulation were based on parameters defined in Ruaro et al.14.
A baseline was initially set by recording 5 min of spontaneous activity prior to stimulation. Once the baseline was established, a 5 min pre-training probing stimulation consisting of a 0.5 Hz biphasic pulse with a 200 µs pulse duration and a 900 mV pulse amplitude (Figure 7a) was administered through the selected stimulation sites (i.e., "L"-shaped). A training protocol was then administered to the networks every 2 s using the same set of electrodes. The training signal was comprised of 40 pulse trains, each containing 100 biphasic pulses, with a 4 ms inter-pulse period, a 200 µs pulse duration, and a 900 mV pulse amplitude (Figure 7b and Figure 7c). This training period was then followed by a 5-min post-training phase, similar to the pre-training stimulation. The protocol was then concluded with a 5-min recording of post-stimulation spontaneous activity.
The same experimental protocol was applied to a control group of cultures to account for natural fluctuations in network response. The only difference in the control protocol, however, was the application of a sham training period, during which no actual training signal was administered.
Statistical analyses of the datasets (i.e., training versus control) were carried out with a one-way ANOVA, with the variable "training" as a between-subject factor. The latency was used as a within-subject factor. If significant interaction was found, Tukey's post-hoc procedure was performed. The results showed a pre-training response within 20 ms post-stimulus, though the range of activity was inconsistent after the first response. However, post-training activity exhibited not only a response within the first 20 ms post-stimulus, as seen during pre-training, but it also exhibited significant activity 30-50 ms post-stimulus (Figure 14 and Figure 15)15. There was also a statistically significant correlation of "spike frequency" versus "time after stimulus" and of "spike reliability" versus "time after stimulus." "Spike reliability" can be defined as the probability of seeing a network response to a stimulation, where a response to each stimulus is assigned a maximum value of 1. Figure 16 shows nearly a 50% increase in spike frequency, as well as a 30-50% increase in spike reliability for trained networks versus control in the range of 20-50 ms post-stimulus. These results suggest that the training fundamentally changed the network dynamics.
Figure 1: Tools and Materials used for Embryo Removal. (A) Ice-filled tray. (B) Petri dishes filled with cold L-15 "slush." (C) Paper towel. (D) Spray bottle with 70% ethanol. (E) Fine forceps (x2). (F) Small surgical scissors. (G) Blunt-nose thumb forceps. (H) Large scissors. (I) Body bag. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 2: Tools and Materials used for Brain Extraction. (A) Ice-filled tray. (B) Petri dish containing embryo heads. (C) Foil-covered centrifuge tube with storage medium. (D) Inverted glass Petri dish. (E) Autoclaved filter paper. (F) Beaker with 70% ethanol. (G) Plastic pipette. (H) Iris scissors. (I) Fine forceps. (J) Thin double-ended spatula. (K) Paper towel. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 3: Optimal versus Non-Optimal Cultures. (A) shows a healthy carpet of cells covering the arrays, in contrast to (B), in which there is poor cell proliferation. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 4: Representative Results of Spontaneous Activity. (A) Representative raster plot of spontaneous activity. The tick marks indicate action potentials recorded from 9 active electrodes during a 20 s window at an acquisition rate of 25 kHz and a bandpass filter range between 3 kHz and 300 Hz. (B) Representative filtered extracellular action potential from an active site. Figure modified from reference15. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 5: Recording Setup. (A) Stimulation generator. (B) Temperature controller. (C) Power supply. (D) Amplifier. (E) Headstage/preamplifier. (F) Capped MEA. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 6: Schematic Representation of the Electrical Training Protocol. Record an initial baseline for 5 min and a probe stimulation for 3 min. Apply tetanic stimulation for 90 s, which is not recorded. Apply and record a second probe stimulation for 3 min and a final baseline for 5 min. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 7: Probing Stimulation and Training Signal Parameters. (A) Probing stimulation consists of ±900 mV bi-phasic pulses administered at a frequency of 0.5 Hz. (B) Pulse trains consist of 100, ±900 mV bi-phasic pulses at a frequency of 250 Hz. (C) The training signal consists of 40 pulse trains administered every 2 s. Figure modified from reference15. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 8: Representation of the "L"-shape Configuration. Squares represent individual electrodes from an MEA. Blue squares indicate electrodes used for stimulation, whereas all others are used for recording. Figure modified from reference15. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 9: Distinguishing Units from Noise and Stimulation Artifacts. The several upper panels (A–C) in this figure show examples of noise in order to clarify what a "unit" should be. (D) The yellow waveform is the only unit detected here. (E) The green waveform is the only unit. (F) Example of a channel that was recorded from an electrode that was also used for stimulation, where no units can be reasonably detected due to amplifier saturation. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 10: Post-stimulus Time Histogram (PSTH). A graphical user interface (see Materials Table) plots the PSTHs according to user input (i.e., population PSTH, biased-average PSTH, or individual channel PSTH), allowing for an overview of the stimulation experiment and for immediate comparison between the post- and pre-stimulus files. It also plots the initial versus final PSTHs; this compares the network response to the first 6 and the last 6 stimuli. The GUI performs several other functions, such as spike rate, inter-spike interval, spikes per burst, inter-burst interval, and burst duration, for both stimulation files and files with spontaneous activity. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 11: Overview of Cell Preparation and Plating. (A) An E17 pregnant mouse is euthanized with CO2. (B) The mouse is decapitated and the uterus is removed. (C) The embryos are released and decapitated. (D) The brain is extracted from each embryo and the frontal lobes are removed. (E) The cells are dissociated. (F) The dissociated cells are suspended in medium. (G) The suspended cells are plated on 60-channel multi-electrode arrays (MEAs). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 12: Neuronal Cultures Plated on Microelectrode Arrays. Embryonic mouse neurons are plated on 60-channel MEAs, which allow for the simultaneous recording of the neuronal activity across the network from each electrode. (Figure modified from reference15). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 13: Sorting Program used to Sort the Waveforms from Each Channel. The sorting program (see Materials Table) loads a data file and displays all the units initially acquired for each channel. One of several methods is selected to assign signals to specific units. In this example, the k-means clustering algorithm was selected, and the yellow unit (labeled "unit a" on the bottom window) was identified. Another program (see Materials Table) is then used to export the .nex file into a .mat file, which is the input file for the custom-made GUI (see Materials Table and Figure 10). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 14: Altered Network Activity in Response to Stimulation after a Training Period. Representative raster plot of activity from eight electrodes. The vertical red line indicates the time of the stimulus, and the black tick marks indicate action potentials. In pre-training (A), there is an immediate response to the stimulus pulse across channels. In post-training (B), the network exhibits a more prolonged activity response, as well as the immediate response to the stimulation15. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 15: Trained Networks have Significantly Altered Spike Frequencies. The frequency of the network spiking for the control networks is calculated by integrating the number of spikes over 50 ms immediately after each stimulation and dividing by that period. Shown is the average of 12 trained and 10 control networks (the error bars indicate the standard error of the mean). The asterisk (*) indicates a statistical difference (p-value <0.05) between the two datasets. Figure modified from reference15. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 16: Synaptically-mediated Responses are Significantly Modified in Trained Networks. (A) The spike reliability, measured in 10 ms bins and normalized to the control networks, shows no change for the direct activation of neurons near electrodes (0-20 ms). There is therefore no statistical difference between controls and trained networks for those bins. On the other hand, the longer-latency responses (30-50 ms), are synaptically mediated, indicating that this method provides a more detailed investigation of reliability than in Figure 15, above. (B) The population spike frequency repeats the behavior of the reliability and shows no modification for the direct activation (0-20 ms), while a statistically significant difference is found for the longer-term responses (30-50 ms). This behavior is consistent with the averaged results in the previous figure15. The error bars are the standard error of the mean, calculated for 10 control networks and 12 trained networks. (*) p-value <0.05; (**) p-value <0.001. Figure modified from reference15. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Qty | Item |
1 | Autoclaved glass reagent bottle (at least 100 mL size) |
20 | 15 mL sterile centrifuge tubes |
1 | 10 mL sterile serological pipette |
4 | 25 mL sterile serological pipette |
2 | 50 mL sterile serological pipette |
1 | Centrifuge tube rack |
150 mL | Sterile DI water |
5 mg | Poly-D-lysine vial |
Table 1: PDL Preparation – List of Materials and Reagents.
Qty | Item |
1 | 50 mL sterile centrifuge tubes |
10 | 15 mL sterile centrifuge tubes |
2 | 1 mL sterile serological pipette |
2 | 50 mL sterile serological pipette |
1 | Centrifuge tube rack |
1 mL | Phosphate buffer saline (PBS) |
1 mg | Laminin |
Table 2: Laminin Preparation – List of Materials and Reagents.
Qty | Item |
1 | Autoclaved glass reagent bottle (at least 100 mL size) |
20 | 15 mL sterile centrifuge tubes |
1 | 10 mL sterile serological pipette |
4 | 25 mL sterile serological pipette |
2 | 50 mL sterile serological pipette |
1 | Centrifuge tube rack |
150 mL | Sterile DI water |
5 mg | Poly-D-lysine vial |
Table 3: Storage Medium Preparation – List of Materials and Reagents.
Qty | Item |
44 mL | DMEM with a stablilzed form of L-glutamine (see table of materials) |
1 mL | Serum-free supplement for neural cell culture (see table of materials) |
2.5 mL | Horse serum |
100 µL | Ascorbic acid [4 mg/mL] |
2.5 mL | Fetal bovine serum (FBS) |
0.5 mL | Pen strep (optional) |
1 | 50 mL sterile centrifuge tubes |
2 | 25 mL sterile serological pipette |
2 | 10 mL sterile serological pipette |
2 | 1 mL sterile serological pipette |
1 | 250 mL filter |
Table 4: DMEM 5/5 Medium Preparation – List of Materials and Reagents.
Qty | Item |
49 mL | DMEM with a stablilzed form of L-glutamine (see table of materials) |
1 mL | Serum-free supplement for neural cell culture (see table of materials) |
100 µL | Ascorbic acid [4 mg/mL] |
0.5 mL | Pen strep (optional) |
1 | 50 mL sterile centrifuge tubes |
2 | 25 mL sterile serological pipette |
2 | 1 mL sterile serological pipette |
1 | 250 mL filter |
Table 5: DMEM+ Medium Preparation – List of Materials and Reagents.
Qty | Item |
1 | Papain 140 U/vial |
1 | Dnase 1,260 U/vial |
7 mL | DMEM+ (chilled) |
5 mL | DMEM 5/5 (warmed) |
10 µL | Trypan blue |
2 | Scalpel blades |
1 | 35 mm sterile Petri dish |
4 | 15 mL sterile centrifuge tubes |
2 | 5 mL sterile cryogenic tubes |
2 | 2 mL sterile cryogenic tubes |
1 | 50 mL sterile centrifuge tubes |
1 | microcentrifuge tube |
2 | Large bore transfer pipette |
3 | Small bore transfer pipette |
5 | 2 mL sterile serological pipette |
5 | 1 mL sterile serological pipette |
2 | 10 µL sterile micropipette tips |
1 | 1000 µL sterile micropipette tips |
1 | Hemocytometer chip |
Table 6: Cell Dissociation – List of Materials and Reagents.
The steps outlined in this protocol provide sufficient detail for the beginner to plate his/her own neuronal cultures on MEAs and to record network activity. This protocol will help to ensure that the cultures adhere properly, forming a carpet layer of cells over the electrode arrays, and remain healthy and contaminant-free for months.
Although it is best to adhere to all parts of the protocol, there are steps throughout the process that are critical to the successful outcome. The use of aseptic technique throughout the entire process is imperative to prevent the cultures from becoming contaminated. New MEAs must be made hydrophilic, as described in the protocol, or else poor cell adhesion will result. Avoiding harsh pipetting and the formation of air bubbles during dissociation will reduce the number of damaged cells plated and will lead to a higher and healthier yield. Switching from DMEM 5/5 to DMEM+ after the first feeding is also important. DMEM 5/5 contains horse serum, which will cause glial cells to dominate the culture if used continuously and will result in poor neuronal activity, although the cultures will appear healthy17. Feeding the cultures as scheduled and keeping them in proper incubating conditions is also crucial.
Plating cell cultures on MEAs involves many variables that can lead to less-than-optimal results. Although the goal is a perfect "carpet" of cells, failure to address the critical steps mentioned above will result in poor cell maturation or in contamination. Poor cell adhesion, which is different from poor cell maturation, is also a concern. This can be caused by several factors, including poor MEA preparation prior to plating or the use of old medium. If old medium containing a stabilized form of L-glutamine and serum-free supplement for neural cell culture (see Materials Table) is used, the cells initially adhere but then float away after about two weeks. If bacterial contamination is a persistent problem, an antibiotic, such as ampicillin or pen-strep, can be added to the medium. There are also fungicides available to treat fungal contamination. These are some of the more common variables that can affect the outcome of the cultures. There are many others that will only be encountered after time and experience.
In comparison to the use of glass microelectrodes, this technique is excellent for studying network dynamics and pharmacological responses. It enables the use of many different spatio-temporal stimulation patterns and allows for the recording of neuronal responses from multiple areas at once. Previous groups have demonstrated interesting results using protocols similar to the ones described here18. Since the cultures last for weeks or months and the same cultures can be reused, this technique also allows for multiple experiments over time on the same network.
However, there are limitations to this technique. MEAs are non-invasive. Therefore, they can only record extracellular activity, as opposed to patch-clamping or intracellular recording with pipettes. Moreover, since each electrode in an array is covered by several cells, it is not possible to resolve the activity of a single neuron. Conversely, because these are in vitro cultures, they cannot fully reproduce the structural properties of networks in the brain. Also, activity can only be recorded for less than 30 min at a time without some mechanism providing a CO2 atmosphere for the cells to maintain their pH balance.
Once this technique is mastered,pharmacological manipulations with or without electrical stimulation can be explored. New protocols to probe learning and memory formation in neuronal networks can also be designed and tested, along with protocols for hippocampal or spinal cord networks. Protocols for the stimulation and training of networks have been previously published, and some of these were further developed into in vivo protocols, such as the "selective adaptation" proposed by Eytan et al.19. Several protocols were tested. However, only results from a modification to the tetanus procedure proposed by Ruaro in 2005 are presented here14,20.
The authors have nothing to disclose.
This work was funded by the National Science Foundation grant CMMI-1300007. We would like to acknowledge previous lab members, who have helped with the design of these protocols and with the maintenance of the cultures for over five years at George Mason University: Dr. Joseph J. Pancrazio, Dr. Hamid Charkhkar, Dr. Gretchen Knaack, Dr. Franz Hamilton, Michael Maquera, and Robert Graham.
Ascorbic Acid | Sigma Aldrich | A4403 | Make 4mg/mL aliquots |
B-27 | Invitrogen | 17504-044 | Serum-free supplement for neural cell culture. Make 1 mL aliquots and freeze |
Beakers – glass – 100 mL | VWR | 13912-160 | |
Beakers – glass – 500 mL | VWR | 10754-956 | |
Blunt-tipped thumb forceps | World Precision Instruments | 500365-G | |
Cryogenic vial – sterile, 2 mL | Fisher Scientific | 10-500-26 | |
Cryogenic vial – sterile, 5 mL | Fisher Scientific | 10-500-27 | |
DMEM with Glutamax | Gibco Life Technology | 10569-010 | Cell culture media that contains a stabilized form of L-glutamine |
DNase | Worthington Biochemical | LK003172 | |
Ethanol | Fisher Scientific | 04-355-451 | |
Fetal bovine serum (FBS) | ATCC | 30-2030 | |
Fine-tipped thumb forceps | World Precision Instruments | 501324-G | |
Glass Pipets | VWR | 14673-010 | |
GlutaMAX — I (100X) | Gibco Life Technology | 35050-061 | A stabilized form of L-glutamine used as a suplement |
Hemocytometer chip | Fisher Scientific | 22-600-101 | |
Hibernate EB complete | BrainBits | D00118 | Ambient CO2 cell storage media |
Horse Serum | Atlanta Biologicals | S12195H | |
Laminin | Sigma Aldrich | L2020-1MG | |
MCS filter amplifier | MultiChannel System | FA60SBC | |
MCS headstage/pre-amplifier | MultiChannel System | MEA1060-INV | |
MCS microelectrode array | MultiChannel System | 60MEA200/10iR-ITO | |
MCS power supply | MultiChannel System | PS20W | |
MCS signal divider | MultiChannel System | SDMEA | |
MCS stimulus generator | MultiChannel System | STG4002 | |
MCS temperature controller | MultiChannel System | TC02 | |
Media storage bottle – glass 500 mL | VWR | 10754-818 | Autoclave |
Microcentrifuge tubes – 0.4 mL | Thermo Fisher | 3485 | Autoclave |
Microcentrifuge tubes – 2 mL | Thermo Fisher | 3434ECONO | Autoclave |
Micropipette tips – 10 uL | VWR | 37001-166 | Autoclave |
Micropipette tips – 1000 uL | VWR | 13503-464 | Autoclave |
Micropipette tips – 200 uL | VWR | 37001-596 | Autoclave |
Micropipetter – 10 uL | Thermo Fisher | 4641170N | |
Micropipetter – 1000 uL | Thermo Fisher | 4641210N | |
Micropipetter – 200 uL | Thermo Fisher | 4641230N | |
Papain – 0.22 Filtered | Worthington Biochemical | LK003178 | |
Penicillin-Streptomycin (Pen Strep) | Thermo Fisher | 15070063 | |
Petri dishes -100mm disposable | Fisher Scientific | 08-757-100D | |
Petri dishes -100mm glass | VWR | 10754-788 | |
Petri dishes -35 mm | Fisher Scientific | 08-757-100A | |
Phosphate buffer saline (PBS) (1X) | Corning | 21-040-CV | |
Plasma Cleaning System | Plasma Etch, Inc. | PE-50 | |
Poly-D-lysine hydrobromide (PDL) | Sigma Aldrich | P6407-5MG | |
Polyethylene conical (centrifuge) tube -15 mL | Fisher Scientific | 05-527-90 | |
Polypropylene conical (centrifuge) tube -50 mL | Falcon | 352070 | |
Procedure masks | Imco | 1530-imc | |
Pyruvate | Sigma Aldrich | P4562-5G | |
Scalpel blades | World Precision Instruments | 500237-G | |
Scissors – iris | World Precision Instruments | 14111-G | |
Scissors – large | World Precision Instruments | 14214 | |
Scissors – small surgical | World Precision Instruments | 501733-G | |
Serological pipette – sterile, 1 mL | VWR | 89130-892 | |
Serological pipette – sterile, 2 mL | VWR | 89130-894 | |
Serological pipette – sterile, 25 mL | VWR | 89130-900 | |
Serological pipette – sterile, 50 mL | VWR | 89130-902 | |
Software: Matlab GUI | Peixoto Lab | npeixoto@gmu.edu | Used to analyze .mat files. Available for free upon request. Contact npeixoto@gmu.edu to request a copy. |
Software: MCS MC_Rack | MultiChannel System | N/A | Used for data acquisition |
Software: NeuroExplorer | Plexon | http://www.plexon.com/products/neuroexplorer | Used to convert .nex files to .mat |
Software: Offline Sorter | Plexon | http://www.plexon.com/products/offline-sorter | Used to sort neural spikes and convert data files to .plx and then to .nex |
Software Manual: MCS MC_Rack | MultiChannel System | https://www.multichannelsystems.com/sites/multichannelsystems.com/files/documents/manuals/MC_Rack_Manual.pdf | |
Software Manual: NeuroExplorer | Plexon | https://www.neuroexplorer.com/downloads/Nex3Manual.pdf | |
Software Manual: Offline Sorter | Plexon | www.plexon.com/system/files/downloads/Offline%20Sorter%20v2.8%20Manual.pdf | |
Spatula – small double-ended | World Precision Instruments | 503440 | |
Stericup 0.22 µm pore filter – 250 mL | Millipore | SCGVU02RE | |
Transfer pipette – large bore | Thermo Fisher | 335-1S | |
Transfer pipette – small bore | Thermo Fisher | 242-1S | |
Trypan blue | Sigma Aldrich | T8154-20ML | |
Whatman filter paper | Whatman | 1442 150 | Cut into 8 pie wedges and autoclave in a glass Petri dish |