Skip to main content
. 2010 Oct 30;8:106. doi: 10.1186/1479-5876-8-106

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Differences between control and wounded animals for 2 phenotypes from the CD31 panel. (A) Average frequency change from baseline (average of frequency differences for week 1 minus week 0, week 2 minus week 0, week 3 minus week 0, and week 4 minus week 0) is shown for control animals (solid circles) versus wounded animals (open circles) for phenotype CD29+CD31+CD56+CXCR4+CD90+Sca1-CD44+ (++++.+-+). The horizontal line represents the process control range (maximum frequency minus minimum frequency, calculated from 6 replicate samples) for this phenotype. There is no significant difference between the cohorts, due in part to the outlier at approximately 0.115 for one animal in the control cohort. (B) The same phenotype analysis with outlier removed shows a statistically significant difference between wounded and control cohorts. (C) Frequency differences between wounded and control animals for the phenotype superset, CD29+CXCR4+CD90+ (+..+.+..), which was common to 19 of the putative myogenic precursor phenotypes shown in Table 4. (D) Longitudinal profiles for all animals for week 0 through week 4 for set CD29+CD31+CD56+CXCR4+CD90+Sca1-CD44+ (++++.+-+). Control animals indicated by C, Wounded by W. Note the week 4 outlier on control animal C-P1120. This animal was removed from the analysis shown in (B) and (C).