Glass-Forming Tendency in the System Water–Dimethyl Sulfoxide

Thermal study of simple amino-alcohol solutions

“…All the other concentrations follow the same trend in warming as they do in cooling: the stability of the amorphous state increases with the compound concentration. This result is similar to what is generally obtained with cryoprotectants [1][2][3]29]. However, if we compare the stability of the amorphous state of the two compounds, we can see from 40% to 45% (w/w) that 21AE is less effective than 31AP.…”

“…Heats of solidification were measured at selected programmed cooling rates of 1, 2.5, 5, 10, 20, 40, 80, 160, and 320 K/min. The actual cooling rates are not determinable on this DSC 7 but according to our previous studies on a DSC 2 , we consider that they must be at least identical to the indicated rates up to 80 K/min [3]. The temperatures of the transitions on warming were determined at warming rates of 1, 2.5, 5, 10, 20, 40, and 80 K/min, after quenching (programmed cooling rate within the range 320-500 K/min) and once after the slowest cooling rate for all the samples.…”

“…Moreover, a deviation may exist at the highest cooling rate 320 K/min, due to the fact that the real cooling rate is smaller. However, it is clear that q max decreases as the compound concentration increases and it is apparent that the critical cooling rate decreases with increasing amino-alcohol concentration, as it is used to be for other cryoprotectants [1][2][3]29]. When comparing the glass-forming tendency of the two compounds, we can see from 40% to 45% (w/w) that 21AE is more effective than 31AP.…”

An improved cryopreservation method for a mouse embryonic stem cell line

“…It is possible that the warming rate of approximately 700°C/minute, although predicted by computer simulation to be within a range that would have negative effects on cell survival, was actually inadequate for the prevention of ice recrystallization during the warming process. As stated previously, Me 2 SO tends to have less stable glass-forming properties than PG [49], which would increase the likelihood of this effect.…”

Effects of Slow Cooling Methods and Vitrification Methods on Red Seabream (Pagrus major) Embryos

“…We inferred that the outer solution vitrified. The difference of cryoprotectants caused the different phenomena between V1 and V2, because PG (used in V2) vitrifies more easily than DMSO [25]. The embryos in V group did not vitrify, which indicated that the cryoprotectant concentration of inner embryo was not high enough to form vitrification at this cooling rate.…”