Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Sep 14.
Published in final edited form as: Methods Cell Biol. 2020 Nov 4;162:223–252. doi: 10.1016/bs.mcb.2020.09.009

Table 1.

Characterization of cryoprotectants for high-pressure freezing of whole C. elegans worms.

Cryoprotectant Adverse effects Ease of handling Degree of cryoprotection Autofluorescence (λex 488 nm, a.u.)
20% BSA None +b +++ 80.68
10% glycerol +a +++ +++ 3.18
0.15 M sucrose None/+ +++ +++ 5.55
20% polyvinyl pyrrolidone (PP) None +++ +++ 25.35
15% dextran +5% BSA None +++ ++/+++ 38.97
Baker’s yeast paste N/A +b +++ 236.88
Perfluorodecalin +++c +++ ++/+++ 0.82
1-Hexadecene +++c +++ +++ 0.85

Candidates were evaluated in terms of their macroscopic adverse effects and toxicity on C. elegans worms, ease of handling during sample preparation, degree of cryoprotection ascertained by microscopic examination, and autofluorescence. The scores are ranked from none to +++ or for each category based on empirical evidence and observations for the first three parameters, made in our laboratory. Autofluorescence scores are semi-quantitative and represent fluorescence values from up to three images acquired with the same parameters and averaged after masking out areas of contamination.

a

Worms appeared swollen.

b

High viscosity of medium.

c

Worms lost structural integrity and became soft and pasty.