Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Apr 28.
Published in final edited form as: Acta Biomater. 2016 Mar 2;35:68–76. doi: 10.1016/j.actbio.2016.03.004

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Examination of gelatin retention. (A) Picrosirius red staining showed that non-crosslinked scaffolds lost the majority of incorporated gelatin after washing (Composite non-crosslinked). In contrast, photo-crosslinked scaffolds retained a portion of incorporated gelatin within the scaffold mesh (Composite crosslinked, red). (B) Non-crosslinked scaffolds showed significantly higher weight loss compared to crosslinked scaffolds. (C) Crosslinked scaffolds retained ~45% of their initial gelatin content based on hydroxyproline assay, while non-crosslinked scaffolds retained less than 3%. (D) Mechanical testing of crosslinked scaffolds demonstrated equivalent maximum load to that of dry composite scaffolds, while non-crosslinked scaffolds showed approximately 16% reduction after washing. *, p<0.05; **, p<0.01, n=4.