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)