TABLE 1

Quantitative comparison of glycoprotein expression in TR- and ME-infected cellsd

Immunoprecipitation antibodyaExtract inputb (ml)StrainFold differencefMean fold difference (±SD)g
TRME
DensitycAdjusted densityeDensityAdjusted density
Anti-gH0.04NDNDNDNDND1.4 (±0.1)
0.13136.74.6106.63.41.3
0.40476.915.9337.810.91.5
1.201,200.740.0872.928.21.4
Anti-gL0.04143.811.1NDNDND4.0 (±1.2)
0.13679.152.2127.29.85.3
0.401,627.3125.2509.339.23.2
1.206,071.3467.01,809.9139.23.4
Anti-gO0.04267.012.1NDNDND27.2 (±9.4)
0.131,008.645.8NDNDND
0.403,805.4173.0120.85.034.4
1.209,251.8420.5478.920.021.1
  • a Seven microliters of rabbit antipeptide serum per immunoprecipitation reaction mixture.

  • b Preparation of radiolabeled cell extracts is described in the legend to Fig. 6 and in Materials and Methods.

  • c Pixel density of bands shown in Fig. 6A as determined using ImageJ version 1.48.

  • d ND, band density not detected.

  • e Density divided by the predicted number of methionine (met) and cysteine (cys) residues: TRgH (17 met, 13 cys), MEgH (17 met, 14 cys), TRgL (3 met, 10 cys), MEgL (3 met, 10 cys), TRgO (16 met, 6 cys), MEgO (18 met, 6 cys).

  • f Adjusted density of TR divided by adjusted density of ME.

  • g Average fold difference between TR and ME ± standard deviation.