Fig. 6: Sensight’s generality in the formaldehyde system.
From: Sensight enables quantitative multivariate engineering of high-performance chemical imaging tools
a Sensing mechanism of formaldehyde probes (FPs). b Probe structures in this study. c Predicted imaging sensitivity of the probes, which was obtained as the normalized predicted radar map area of each probe by the model. d Validation of LPS-induced inflammation in BV2 cells by quantifying IL-1β secretion. Data shown were mean ± s.d. (n = 3). e Fluorescence images of BV2 cells first stimulated with LPS (24 h) and then stained with FP9 (5 μM, 1 h). Quantification data were shown in g as mean ± s.d. (n = 9). f The measured probe imaging sensitivity, which was the normalized data of ΔFc obtained under the LPS 4 ng/mL condition. h Correlation between predicted ΔFc and measured ΔFc values of the probes, with the bar chart showing the mean difference with 95% confidence intervals. FP1, FP2 and FP5 channel: λex = 405 nm, λem = 406–504 nm, FP3 channel: λex = 405 nm, λem = 450–504 nm, FP4 channel: λex = 405 nm, λem = 450–520 nm, FP6, FP7 and FP8 channel: λex = 488 nm, λem = 489–550 nm, FP9 channel: λex = 561 nm, λem = 565–700 nm. Scale bar, 20 μm. P values were analyzed by a two-way ANOVA test; ns represents no significance. Source data for c, d, f–h are provided as a Source Data file.
