Skip to main content
. 2024 Nov 25;20(11):e1012728. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1012728

Fig 5. SEOV infection does not inhibit subsequent ISG induction.

Fig 5

A) RLMVECs were mock-infected or infected with SEOV (MOI 0.1) for 72 hours, followed by transfection with poly(I:C) (100 ng). RNA was collected 24-hours post-treatment to assess ISG expression. B-C) RLMVECs were mock-infected or infected with SEOV (MOI 0.1) for 48 hours (B) or 72 hours (C), followed by IFNβ treatment (100 U/mL). RNA was collected at 24 hours post-treatment to evaluate ISG induction. D) RLMVECs were mock-infected or infected with SEOV (MOI 0.05) for 5 days, followed by either mock infection or superinfection with SeV (150 HAU/mL). RNA was collected 24 hours after SeV infection to measure viral genome copies and ISG expression using qRT-PCR and comparative RT-PCR, respectively. E) RLMVEC Cas9 scramble, RIG-I-/-, or MDA5-/- cells were either mock-infected or infected with SEOV (MOI 0.05) 48 hours. Cells were the either subsequently superinfected with HTNV (MOI 0.05) or mock-infected. Lysates were collected at the indicated times post-HTNV infection and subjected to SDS-PAGE and immunoblot analysis. Densitometry quantification of immunoblots in S7 Fig. All data shown represent ≥3 independent experiments, with technical replicates averaged within each experiment ±SD. One-way ANOVA with multiple comparisons to mock-infected poly(I:C), IFNβ, or SeV-treated control (* denotes p<0.05).