Skip to main content
. 2020 Oct 5;3(5):1589–1600. doi: 10.1016/j.matt.2020.09.021

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Evaluation of Sampling Efficiency of Different Swabs in a Rat Model

(A) The rat was fed with FITC-labeled streptavidin to mimic an infection model.

(B) The MN swab was loaded with biotin to capture FITC-labeled streptavidin. A regular swab was applied as a control.

(C) Fluorescence image of MNs after collecting samples from the oral rat cavity.

(D) Comparisons of sampling efficiency of different swabs. Mean ± SD (n = 3). ∗∗p < 0.01, ∗∗∗p < 0.001.

(E) Histology analysis indicated that MNs penetrated the oral epithelium to induce microscaled channels compared with the regular swab.

(F) Fluorescence image of MN/biotin swabs indicated separated signal distribution.

(G) The impacts of the ratios of high-crosslinked MNs to low-crosslinked ones on sampling efficiency of MN/biotin swabs.

(H) The fluorescence-time profile showed that the whole sampling process could be completed within 10 s, similar to that using regular swabs.