TABLE 2.
Summary comparison of wild-type and mutant virus titers
| Expt | Virus titer (% of wild type)
|
|||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wild type | I− | C− | I−/C− | |
| Titer stock (end point)a | 100 | 60 | 30 | 5 |
| Survey time course (end point)b | 100 | 100 | 100 | 50 |
| Time course plaque assayc | ||||
| Data from day 8 | 44d | 65 | 41 | 8 |
| Data from day 9 | 100 | 78e | 53 | 14 |
a
10-fold dilutions of stock tested.
b
100-fold dilutions of each time point tested.
c
10-fold dilutions tested; range based on results of “survey”titration above; data from Fig. 7.
d
Values calculated as percentage of wild-type virus titer on day 9, due to lag resulting from relatively lower multiplicity of infection of wild-type virus inoculum (Fig. 7 and legend).
e
Standard deviation was high for this data point (legend to Fig. 7).