A customizable method for the administration of secreted immune proteins into the living mouse brain for temporal and spatial characterization of neuroimmune interactions.
Method Article
A customizable method for the administration of secreted immune proteins into the living mouse brain for temporal and spatial characterization of neuroimmune interactions.
Although secreted immune proteins have increasingly been recognized to influence nervous system function, technical barriers persist in defining their spatiotemporal dynamics within the brain’s complex environment. For example, microglia, a population of key immune cells in the brain, release a variety of factors that interact with many diverse cellular targets. Microglia-derived proteins can signal to other cell types via mechanisms such as surface receptor binding without internalization, passive membrane transport, phagocytic uptake, or endocytosis-mediated uptake. Here, a method for localized delivery of a microglia-derived secreted protein is presented to dissect mechanisms of cellular interaction and downstream functional outcomes in vivo. We describe how to prepare protein samples for delivery, how to perform stereotaxic administration of protein to target brain regions, and best practices for the collection and preparation of brain tissue to visualize fixation-sensitive proteins by immunohistochemistry. This approach provides a versatile framework for spatiotemporally controlled studies of neuroimmune communication, enabling mechanistic exploration of how immune-derived proteins dynamically regulate neuronal and brain function.
Neuroimmune communication, or the molecular conversation between the nervous and immune systems, has only recently been established as essential to the understanding of health and disease. The brain, once thought to be largely protected from immune system activity1,2, is now recognized as containing highly dynamic immune niches, allowing the nervous system to both send and receive immune signals throughout the body3. This robust, bi-directional crosstalk is most often mediated by immunocompetent cells that live either in the brain or at the nervous system interfaces, like the choroid plexus, meninges, and perivascular spaces4. In the brain parenchyma proper, however, immune signaling is primarily mediated by microglia, the long-lived, tissue-resident macrophages that first seed the brain during embryonic development. Although often experimentally investigated with special attention paid to their phagocytic functions, microglia also interact with both their immediate environments and across long distances through their release of a wide variety of immune factors5.
Modeling complex, multifactorial conditions like infections, injuries, and diseases in vivo, while beneficial in providing a holistic understanding of the nervous system under stress, leads to a cascade of factors with widespread and diverse consequences that can be hard to disentangle. Further, given the high heterogeneity amongst cells between brain regions, pinning down the causal release and associated effects of individual factors remains challenging. While tools such as lentiviral and adeno-associated viral vectors that allow for over-expression of specific factors following a location-precise infection have enabled investigation of the roles of secreted factors from other brain cells, such as neurons and astrocytes, in a variety of contexts, microglia thus far remain difficult to specifically and robustly modulate in this way6. Therefore, the ability to deliver microglia-derived signaling molecules to a defined brain location provides a useful method to separate their precise roles and consequences in different contexts.
The goal of this method is to spatiotemporally deliver microglia-derived factors into the brain of a living mouse in order to allow for downstream investigation of the functional impacts of a protein or molecule of interest. Moreover, this intracranial administration method is adaptable to many other contexts and questions, such as via the co-administration of multiple factors, like interacting immune factors or inhibitors, or the investigation of tissue responses across a time course of interest. While this protocol will describe tissue collection and preparation for immunohistochemical endpoints, a variety of other brain endpoints could be paired with this administration method, such as collecting fresh-frozen tissue punches from a brain region of interest for qPCR or protein abundance via Western blot or ELISA, or performing electrophysiological recordings of neuronal activity in an injected brain region.
All procedures involving animals are conducted in accordance with the National Institutes of Health Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and under protocols approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) at the institution of investigation. All procedures outlined here were reviewed and approved by IACUC at Duke University. The reagents and the equipment used are listed in the Table of Materials.
1. (Optional) Preparation of the injectate with the label of interest
2. Preparation of equipment for the surgical procedure
3. Stereotaxic surgical procedure
NOTE: All surgeries were performed in a highly ventilated surgical suite, and all personnel wore personal protective gear consisting of gloves, face masks, hair covers, shoe covers, and gowns. Isoflurane gas exposure is a health risk and thus requires a scavenging system, such as activated charcoal canisters, which should be weighed before and after isoflurane use. Ensure all equipment, such as the anesthesia vaporizer, ventilation systems, and scavenging equipment, is properly certified and calibrated before use.
4. Injection of the protein of interest and surgical recovery
5. Preparation of tissue for the immunohistochemical procedure
6. Performing immunohistochemistry for the injected protein
C1q is a large (~450 kD) protein highly expressed throughout the body with well-defined roles in the innate immune system as a key member of the classical complement pathway. However, the functional roles of C1q in the brain are still under investigation. C1q in the brain is primarily made by and released from microglia, the brain’s resident immune cell population9. The role of C1q in processes such as synaptic removal across normal brain development, learning and memory, and in disease contexts has been repeatedly demonstrated10,11,12,13,14. C1q has also been observed to accumulate within or immediately adjacent to neuronal structures as the brain ages, in both rodents and non-human primates9,15,16. Our lab is interested in the functional consequences of C1q accumulation in the brain during aging. This study discovered that C1q interacts with neuronal intracellular proteins in adult and aging rodents, including RNA-binding proteins8. Because T cells have been previously shown to internalize C1q derived from other cell types17, we determined if neurons are also able to internalize exogenous C1q in vivo.
This study first performed unilateral intracerebroventricular (ICV) injections of 2 µL of C1q protein into 3-month-old male mice. Because C1q is expressed in the wild-type adult brain, we used two approaches: first, C1q protein was injected into a C1q -/- (knockout) mouse, and second, the C1q was fluorescently labeled through 594-maleimide conjugation to allow one to distinguish between native and exogenous C1q protein in a C1q +/+ (wild-type) animal. Protein was administered at a concentration of 1 mg/mL, suspended in a buffer solution of 10 mM HEPES, 300 mM NaCl, pH 7.2. The following stereotaxic coordinates were used for a left hemisphere ICV injection: X = +1.0 mm, Y = -0.4 mm, Z = -2.5 mm, and the volume was injected at a rate of 500 nL/min. To reduce backflow, the glass-pulled needle used to inject was left in place for 5 min after the cessation of injection before removal. Tissue was collected 1 h following injection and processed for immunohistochemical analysis in sagittal sections. Successful injection should result in localized fluorescence to the stereotaxically targeted area.
First, in C1q -/- mice, we imaged 30 µm sagittal sections of the left (Figure 3A) and right (Figure 3B) hemisphere after the full immunohistochemistry procedure (Steps 6.1–6.17). An anti-NeuN antibody was used for visualizing neuronal somas (cyan), and an anti-C1q antibody (red) to visualize non-tagged C1q that was injected 1 h prior into the left ventricle. There is abundant C1q observed in the left hemisphere in the peri-ventricular parenchyma, and high colocalization between neuronal cell bodies and C1q in hippocampal CA3 (Figure 3A), similar to what we observe in a wild-type mouse with endogenous C1q expression. As expected, injected C1q is not observed around the ventricles (or anywhere in the parenchyma) in the contralateral hemisphere 1 h after injection (Figure 3B). Next, brains of C1q +/+ wild-type (C57BL/6J) mice that were ICV-injected with C1q-594 were imaged. Here, it was confirmed that C1q-594 (magenta) could be visualized in 30 µm sagittal sections with only autofluorescence quenching and coverslipping with DAPI (blue) (Steps 6.12–6.17). In the left (injected) hemisphere, fluorescently tagged injected C1q (magenta) is observed in the same peri-ventricular distribution (Figure 3C).
In order to confirm neuronal colocalization, a secondary experiment was performed with two C1q -/- 2-month-old males. In one hemisphere, mice received an ICV injection of 2 µL of C1q-594, and in the other hemisphere, mice received 2 µL of heat-inactivated (HI) C1q-594. Heat inactivation was performed following 594-maleimide conjugation, when half of the prepared protein was placed in a heat block set to 56 °C for 30 min. Heat inactivation has been previously shown to alter native C1q protein structure and disrupt activation18. Normal, native C1q at a concentration of 200 µg/mL in suspension buffer (50 mM HEPES, 150 mM NaCl, pH 7.5) is soluble in solution and does not form any visible aggregates under brightfield microscopy (Figure 4A). In contrast, when the same protein preparation was heated, visible aggregates were observable under brightfield (Figure 4B), suggestive of a protein conformation change. Next, it was determined if the injection of HI-C1q in vivo would change neuronal uptake of C1q. Brains were collected 1 h after injection, and each hemisphere was processed identically as described in the above protocol. In 20 µm sagittal sections, immunohistochemistry was performed to identify neurons. 40x images were captured with identical settings of hippocampal CA3 to capture NeuN+ neurons (cyan) and C1q-594 (red) (Figure 5A,B). In the normal C1q-594-injected hemisphere, robust C1q labeling was observed (Figure 5A), whereas in HI-C1q-594-injected hemispheres, there was no observed C1q-594 in CA3, though the fluorescent protein could be observed collecting around the ventricle edges (Figure 4C), consistent with a change to the normal C1q protein function of neuronal uptake. Quantification of NeuN+ cells by manual quantification by a blinded experimenter in 8, 40x fields of view revealed no changes in the density of neurons in CA3 across hemispheres (Figure 5D), however the percent of neurons that were C1q+ was significantly reduced in hemispheres injected with HI-C1q-594 (Figure 5C) by two-tailed t-test (p = 0.026, n = 2 animals, 2 images of each hemisphere per animal analyzed).

Figure 1: Surgical setup and surgical sterile field preparation. (A) Surgical equipment: 1. Stereotax, 2. Rodent warmer, 3. Isoflurane vaporizer, 4. Isoflurane scavenging canister, 5. Digital stereotax arm, 6. Microinjector, 7. Drill, 8. Stereo microscope. (B) Autoclave tools and sterile field surgical towel with a steam indicator strip to confirm sterility. (C) Autoclaved tools are carefully placed “tips in” to the sterile field designated on the autoclaved surgical towel. Handles remain outside the sterile center, and tips of tools should only contact the animal following sterilization with betadine and 70% ethanol. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 2: Brain processing and freezing for sagittal sectioning. (A) Use a razor blade to cut the brain down midline, then place each hemisphere midline-side facing down in a freezing mold. (B) Fill the molds with a 50:50 mix of freezing embedding medium and 30% sucrose in PBS. (C) Freeze the brains in molds on dry ice (left). They will become opaque when fully frozen (right). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 3: Representative results of intracerebroventricular (ICV) administration of C1q protein 1 h after injection. (A) Sagittal section of injected C1q protein (red) and NeuN+ neuronal somas (cyan) in the injected hemisphere, and an inset of the CA3 hippocampal region adjacent to the ventricle. (B) Sagittal section of the opposite hemisphere from the injection in the same animal, with injected C1q protein (red) and NeuN+ neuronal somas (cyan), and an inset of CA3. (C) Sagittal section of a wild-type animal injected ICV with C1q fluorescently tagged using 594-maleimide conjugation (magenta), not amplified by immunohistochemistry, but coverslipped with DAPI (blue), and an inset of CA3. Left image scale bars = 1000 µm, right image scale bars = 150 µm. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 4: Heat-inactivation of C1q protein. (A) Native C1q protein, suspended in buffer (50 mM HEPES, 150 mM NaCl, pH 7.5) at 200 μg/mL imaged with brightfield microscopy. (B) The same C1q protein source, suspended in the same buffer at the same concentration, but heat-treated at 56 °C for 30 min before imaging with brightfield microscopy. (C) Localization of heat-inactivated (HI)-C1q-594 (red) and NeuN+ cells (cyan) in a sagittal section 1 h after ICV injection. Top scale bar = 10 µm, bottom scale bar = 1000 µm. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 5: Quantification of normal versus heat-inactivated C1q protein uptake into neurons in the hippocampus. (A) Sagittal section of the CA3 region of the hippocampus adjacent to the ventricle, where C1q-594 was injected 1 h prior. NeuN+ neuronal somas (cyan), C1q-594 (red), and overlay of the two. (B) Sagittal section of the CA3 region of the hippocampus adjacent to the ventricle, where heat-inactivated (HI)-C1q-594 was injected 1 h prior. NeuN+ neuronal somas (cyan), C1q-594 (red), and overlay of the two. (C) Quantification of the percent of NeuN+ cells that are C1q-594+ in the 40x field of view, two-tailed t-test. (D) Quantification of the number of NeuN+ cells in the 40x field of view, two-tailed t-test. Scale bars = 50 µm. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
| Protein Labeling | Antibody | |
| Visualization | Direct, not dependent on an antibody | May have cross-reactivity with other proteins, dependent on antigen availability |
| Preparation | Longer, more technical preparation and validation of protein of interest as labeling may alter protein structure and function. Reaction yields may be poor and require large volumes of input protein | No preparation, many antibodies are commercially available and already validated |
| Experimental Flexibility | Live-tracking possible if desired | Requires fixation |
| Sensitivity | Limited sensitivity due to stoichiometry | Allows for amplification |
Table 1: Advantages and disadvantages of protein labeling vs. antibody detection.
Emerging evidence supports a critical role of microglia in CNS homeostasis mediated by an increasingly complex repertoire of secreted factors5. The ability to deliver microglia-derived factors in a defined spatiotemporal manner provides a valuable tool to disentangle complex neuroimmune communication under a variety of environmental and genetic conditions.
This method can be easily adapted to answer a variety of biological questions. While this method was previously used to better understand the roles of C1q, a very large protein, in neuronal function8, it could also be applied to investigate the roles of other large proteins, as well as small proteins such as cytokines and chemokines. While the immune roles of cytokines and chemokines are fairly well understood, in vivo, these factors are often released together, in response to a stressor, and in a widespread fashion. Further, the non-immune/non-canonical, often homeostatic roles of different immune factors are becoming increasingly apparent. Use of this method would allow for investigation of specific factors in isolation, as well as in specific brain regions, and even the roles of these factors in homeostasis. Another beneficial application of this protocol would be the administration of proteins of interest in transgenic mouse lines, such as in knockout lines or models of specific disease states. The ability to control the precise localization and amount of a protein of interest in a mouse with no endogenous expression of that protein can be used to determine whether acute, localized administration of the protein induces an effect, such as a behavioral change. Alternatively, one could inject into a transgenic line lacking a specific receptor or signaling protein hypothesized to be important for the function of the injected factor.
Additionally, the intracranial administration of microglia-derived factors can be performed in tandem with the injection of other factors to better our mechanistic understanding of a protein’s function. For example, in order to determine how C1q, a microglia-derived protein, enters neurons and interacts with their translational machinery, we previously used this technique to co-administer an endocytosis inhibitor 30 min prior to C1q injection. This allowed us to determine that C1q can enter neurons via endocytosis, as co-application with the inhibitor led to a significant reduction in C1q within neurons8. Similar experiments could be performed with the administration of blocking antibodies or even other hypothesized competitive binding factors. These co-administration experiments can also be modulated temporally by extending or reducing the injection intervals, for example, injecting one factor 30 min before the other, or one factor 5 min versus 1 h prior.
Several factors should be considered when designing experiments using this methodology, beginning with the strategy for detecting the protein of interest. Here, two representative approaches were demonstrated: direct fluorescent labeling of the protein (Figure 3C) and immunohistochemical detection using antibodies (Figure 3A), each with distinct advantages and limitations (Table 1). Antibody-based detection is highly sensitive and enables signal amplification but requires tissue fixation, making it unsuitable for applications such as live imaging of protein dynamics. Direct fluorescent labeling avoids this limitation but requires modification of the protein itself, which may affect its properties and therefore should be validated. Regardless of the approach, careful validation is essential. Commercial antibodies are widely available but may exhibit off-target binding or cross-reactivity, making specificity testing critical. Whenever possible, antibody performance should be confirmed using appropriate controls, such as comparison of staining in wild-type and protein knockout tissue, which remains the gold standard for antibody validation.
In contrast, direct fluorescent labeling requires both preparation and validation before experimental use. Although this approach enables direct visualization of the protein without relying on antibodies, it is essential to confirm that the fluorescent tag does not alter protein structure, localization, interactions, or function. Appropriate validation is protein-dependent but may include confirming the expected molecular weight by Western blot, verifying normal cellular or subcellular localization, or assessing preservation of known protein–protein interactions through assays such as co-immunoprecipitation. Ultimately, both antibody-based detection and direct protein labeling have inherent advantages and limitations, and the most appropriate approach should be determined empirically through pilot studies tailored to the protein of interest and published recommendations19.
In order for this methodology to be reliable, it is important that the stereotaxic coordinates and injected protein concentration selected by the experimenter are empirically optimized and validated in advance. Coordinate validation can be accomplished through pilot injection of a dye, such as Fast Green, and then collecting the brain immediately following injection. This will allow for visual confirmation of dye localization to the region of interest, as well as the opportunity to adjust coordinates for the most accurate injection possible. The authors recommend referencing previously published work to determine accurate stereotaxic coordinates for regions of interest or calculating coordinates to test on large or small mice based on the bregma-lambda ratio, as described in the Protocol.
In order to make experimental conclusions about your injected protein, there are a number of key controls that should be considered and included in a well-designed experiment. There are inherent challenges to studying microglia-derived proteins via intracranial administration. If an experimenter is interested in the response to a particular protein in a specific brain region, the surgery itself will be inflammatory and may confound findings. When considering immune-related proteins, the simplest to perform are surgical controls, where either or both a sham surgery is performed (all steps except the injection of a protein) or a vehicle control injection is performed (all steps, but instead of protein injected, the same volume of only the protein buffer solution is injected). These help distinguish between effects that are surgery- or tissue-damage dependent versus a result of the protein itself. Even more definitive would be to include a control where either an inactive or irrelevant protein is injected at the same volume and concentration. It is important to consider the relative size of the control protein compared to the experimental protein; for example, C1q is a very large protein (~450 kD), so injecting a common control protein like bovine serum albumin (~66 kD) may not be the most appropriate. Therefore, heat-inactivated C1q was used as an inactive protein control. Depending on the spread of the protein injected in the desired time window before collection, this may be performed as a within-subject control by including one of these control conditions in the contralateral hemisphere to the experimentally injected hemisphere, as seen in Representative Results (Figure 4 and Figure 5).
An important consideration in experimental design is the tissue fixation strategy, as both the type and duration of fixation can profoundly influence protein visualization, tissue morphology, and, in some cases, protein function. Crosslinking fixatives such as paraformaldehyde (PFA) generally provide superior preservation of tissue architecture but may reduce detection of fixation-sensitive epitopes through excessive protein crosslinking, increase autofluorescence, and necessitate antigen retrieval. In contrast, non-crosslinking fixatives such as alcohol-, acetone-, or methanol-based solutions often better preserve fixation-sensitive proteins but can compromise tissue integrity. These tradeoffs can be mitigated by optimizing fixation duration and method, including the use of fresh-frozen sections with on-slide fixation, saline perfusion followed by brief PFA immersion, or standard perfusion fixation, depending on the experimental goals. Because no single fixation strategy is optimal for all applications, investigators should select and empirically optimize fixation conditions based on their primary experimental endpoints to achieve the best balance between tissue preservation and protein detection.
The purpose of this protocol is to standardize protein delivery rather than prescribe methods for quantifying experimental outcomes; however, several approaches may be useful depending on the study objectives. In this example, cell-type-specific protein uptake is assessed by immunolabeling with antibodies against cellular markers (e.g., NeuN for neurons) and quantifying colocalization with the protein of interest (Figure 5), although fluorescent reporter mouse lines provide an alternative means of identifying specific cell populations. Another important outcome is protein diffusion, which is strongly influenced by the biochemical properties of the injected protein. When accurate characterization of protein spread is required, we recommend co-injecting an inert fluorescent tracer, such as dextrans of defined molecular weights, to estimate injection distribution and tissue diffusion at defined time points following intracranial delivery. These experiments were previously performed by the authors to determine experimental parameters for the Representative Results section8.
Finally, optimization of protein detection and intracranial delivery may be necessary during troubleshooting. One common challenge is obtaining a reliable fluorescent signal from the protein of interest. As discussed above, the fixation strategy is a major determinant of signal quality. If high autofluorescence is accompanied by a weak true fluorescent signal, it is recommended to first reduce the duration and/or extent of tissue fixation, as overfixation is common and can contribute to both increased autofluorescence and reduced target signal. This protocol also incorporates an autofluorescence-quenching solution, which can improve the signal-to-noise ratio of the target fluorescence. When performed correctly, the injection procedure should result in minimal tissue damage. Cavitation or lesion formation at the injector entry site should not be observed. If either occurs, the preparation of the glass-pulled pipettes may need to be optimized to ensure clean tissue penetration. For example, confirm that the pipette tip is sufficiently rigid and does not bend upon contact with the brain parenchyma, and adjust the bevel as needed to produce a sharp edge that facilitates smooth entry. For injections into deep brain regions, the length of the pulled pipette may also need to be increased to allow the target region to be reached without the injector contacting the brain surface. When delivering injectate directly into the brain parenchyma rather than into a ventricle, a small injection volume (<1 µL) is recommended to minimize edema, prevent cavitation at the injection site, and reduce backflow of injectate during pipette withdrawal. It is also recommended injecting slowly (<500 nL/min) and waiting 5–10 min after completion of the injection before withdrawing the pipette to allow the injectate to diffuse into the surrounding tissue. If liquid is observed flowing back along the injection track during pipette removal or is detected along the injection tract after immunohistochemical processing, the injection volume and/or injection rate should be reduced, and the post-injection waiting period should be extended.
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
This work was supported by funding from the National Alzheimer’s Coordinating Center (NACC; NSH), the Alzheimer’s Association (NSH), and the Duke Institute for Brain Sciences (DIBS) Germinator Award (JD).
| Name | Company | Catalog Number | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.9% Saline (pharmaceutical grade) | Cytiva | Z1376 | |
| 30 mL syringes | Becton, Dickinson and Company (BD) | 302832 | |
| 70% ethanol | Koptec | UN1170 | |
| Alexa Fluo 594 C5 Maleimide | Invitrogen | A10256 | |
| Anesthesia vaporizer | RWD | TAIJI-IE | |
| Bead sterilizer | VWR | 75999-324 | |
| BSA | Genessee Scientific | 25-529 | |
| Butterfly needle - Vacutainer Safety-Lok | Becton, Dickinson and Company (BD) | 367281 | |
| Coverslips - 50 mm No. 1 | Avantor (VWR) | 48393-081 | |
| Digital rodent stereotax | RWD | 68803 | |
| Disposable freezing molds | Electron Microscopy Sciences | 70182 | 22 mm x 22 mm for adult mouse brain sagittal sections |
| Dissecting microscope | Leica | MZ FLIII | |
| Embedding medium - Tissue-Tek OCT | Sakura | 4583 | |
| Eye lubricant | Optixcare | OPX-4242 | |
| Glass pipette puller | Sutter Instrument Co. | Model P-30 | We use 1.14 MM, 3.5" size for our injector |
| Glass pipettes | World Precision Instruments | 504949 | |
| Goat anti Rabbit AF594 secondary | Invitrogen | A-11012 | |
| Goat anti Rat AF488 secondary | Invitrogen | A-11006 | |
| Hair removal cream | Nair | 42016527 | |
| Heated stage - Rodent Warmer X1 | Stoelting | 53800M | |
| High Speed Rotatory Micromotor (Drill) with drill bits | Stoelting | 51449 | |
| Isoflurane | Dechra | Isospire | |
| Microinjector and controller | WPI | NANOLITER2020 | |
| Microscope slides | Premiere | 8348 | |
| Mineral oil, light | Fisher Scientific Education | S25439 | |
| Mounting media with DAPI | Sigma-Aldrich | F6057 | |
| Nail polish | Electron Microscopy Sciences | 72180 | |
| Native mouse complement C1q protein | Creative Biolabs | CTP-463 | Other manufacturers may contain molecular contaminents that inhibit normal brain C1q dynamics |
| Pap pen - ImmEdge Pen | Vector Laboratories | H-4000 | |
| Paraformaldehyde - 16% | Electron Microscopy Sciences | 15710 | Dilute to 4% |
| Phospohate buffered saline (PBS) | Sigma-Aldrich | P3813 | |
| Povidone-Iodine Solution, 10% (w/v) | Ricca | 3955-16 | |
| Rabbit anti C1q primary antibody | Abcam | ab182451 | |
| Rat anti NeuN (RBFOX3) primary antibody | Biolegend | 608451 | |
| Saponin | Sigma-Aldrich | 47036 | |
| Scalpel blades - No. 10 | VWR | 76457-442 | |
| Steam indicator strips | Steris | 801010 | |
| Puritan Sterile Cotton Tipped Applicators | Puritan | 25-806 1WC | |
| Sucrose | Sigma-Aldrich | 84097 | |
| Surgical towels | McKesson | 16-6006-B | |
| Tissue adhesive - Vetbond | 3M | 1469SB | |
| Tris buffered saline | Sigma-Aldrich | T5941, S7653 | |
| TrueBlack | BIOTIUM | 23007 |
This article has been published
Video Coming Soon