Fig. 2: Preparation, physicochemical characterization, and cytoskeletal remodeling function of the hybrid lipoplex (RLS/HS@Au). | Nature Communications

Fig. 2: Preparation, physicochemical characterization, and cytoskeletal remodeling function of the hybrid lipoplex (RLS/HS@Au).

From: The hybrid lipoplex induces cytoskeletal rearrangement via autophagy/RhoA signaling pathway for enhanced anticancer gene therapy

Fig. 2

a Preparation steps for HS, HS@Au, and RLS/HS@Au. b Size distribution and ζ potential of HS@Au, RLS assemblies, and various lipolexes, as detected by dynamic light scattering (DLS). n = 3 independent experimental units. c The representative transmission electron microscopy (TEM) image of HS@Au and various lipoplexes. The scale bar is 100 nm. n = 3 independent experimental units with similar results. d Changes in particle size and ζ potential of different lipoplexes in culture medium with or without 10% FBS for 24 h. n = 3 independent experimental units. e Young’s modulus and f representative morphology images of RLS and RLS/HS@Au with distinctive stiffness measured by atomic force microscope (AFM). n = 3 independent experimental units with similar results. The scale bar is 100 nm. g Representative fluorescence images of the lipoplexes distributed along F-actin in well-spread cells after 4 h of transfection observed by confocal laser scanning microscope (CLSM). (Blue: DAPI stained nucleus, Green: FITC-phalloidin stained F-actin, Red: Cy5-labeled DNA). n = 3 independent experimental cell lines. The scale bar is 5 μm. h Typical trajectories of HepG2 cells after treatment with various lipoplexes. Different colored lines represent the motion trajectories of 15 randomly selected cells within 24 h. i Migration distances of HepG2 cells with different lipolexes treatments, calculated from Fig. 2h. n = 15 cells migration distances analyzed from 3 independent experimental cell lines. Boxplots show the distribution of expression with the center of the box representing the mean, the center line corresponding to the median, and upper and lower bounds representing 75% and 25% percentiles. Two-sided unpaired Student’s t test was used for the comparisons in (e) and (i). The data in (b, d, e, and i) are mean ± SD. p values < 0.05 were considered statistically significant. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.

Back to article page