10.6084/m9.figshare.c.3610664_D7.v1 Valeria Silva-Álvarez Valeria Silva-Álvarez Ana Folle Ana Folle Ana Ramos Ana Ramos Eduardo Kitano Eduardo Kitano Leo Iwai Leo Iwai Inés Corraliza Inés Corraliza Betina Córsico Betina Córsico Ana Ferreira Ana Ferreira Additional file 3: of Echinococcus granulosus Antigen B binds to monocytes and macrophages modulating cell response to inflammation Springer Nature 2016 Echinococcus granulosus Antigen B HLBP Cell binding Lipoproteins Monocytes Macrophages 2016-02-04 05:00:00 Figure https://springernature.figshare.com/articles/figure/Additional_file_3_of___Echinococcus_granulosus_Antigen_B_binds_to_monocytes_and_macrophages_modulating_cell_response_to_inflammation/4361252 Binding of native EgAgB to THP-1 derived monocytes and macrophages employing EB7 mab. Binding of native EgAgB to THP-1 derived monocytes and macrophages was analysed employing EB7 mab followed by incubation with goat anti-mouse IgG/IgM antibody conjugated to FITC. As control, cells were incubated with binding buffer instead of native EgAgB (PBS), without adding EB7 mab (w/EB7) or using mouse IgG1 kappa isotype control instead of EB7 mab (IC). In left panels figure shows the histograms with the distribution of cell population as function of FITC fluorescence for controls (grey) and EgAgB-treated cells (red). Histograms are representative of four independent experiments for each cell type. In right panels binding indexes were plotted vs. native EgAgB concentrations (1, 5 and 10 μg/ml) for monocytes (upper panels) and macrophages (bottom panels). Data are expressed as mean ± SEM of four independent experiments. Asterisks (*) indicate significant differences with respect to the control with BB according to the analysis by t-test (p < 0.05), while number signs (#) indicate significant differences in the binding indexes obtained at 1 and 10 μg/ml native EgAgB (one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post-test, p < 0.05). (TIF 11902 kb)