Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: Nanomedicine. 2017 Apr 17;13(6):1925–1932. doi: 10.1016/j.nano.2017.04.004

Figure 3. Histological analysis of peptide binding to the urothelium.

Figure 3

A) Low magnification (2x objective) images of entire bladders treated with CGKRK as described in Figure 2A. Upper image is fluorescence; lower image is the corresponding H&E staining (consecutive sections). There was widespread binding of CGKRK around the lumen (asterisk); B) High magnification (20x) objective of CGKRK treated bladder revealed accumulation of the peptide in the urothelium layer (U) and also some penetration in the muscle layer (ML). Cropped image below shows significant accumulation in the cells; C) FITC intensity in the bladder was quantified with ImageJ (p-value<0.05, non-paired two-tailed t-test, 3 sections per group). The experiment was repeated 3 times; D) low magnification (2x objective) images of entire bladder treated with KAREC show some fluorescence deposition in the area of injury, although it was less efficient and less widespread than CGKRK. Asterisk marks bladder lumen, and dotted line delineates the urothelium/lumen boundary. Size bar = 200 μm.