Skip to main content
. 2011 May 20;11:55. doi: 10.1186/1472-6750-11-55

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Comparison of lenti- and retroviral vectors with different pseudotypes. (A) LV production was either performed with (+) or without (-) VSV.G pseudotyping and 40 ml of the cell culture SN were purified using MA/UF and analyzed by p24-ELISA, respectively. The viral particles per ml were calculated (n = 3, mean +SEM). (B) Schematic representation of oncoretroviral vector used. eGFP, enhanced green fluorescent protein; LTR, long terminal repeat. (C) Oncoretroviral vectors were produced with VSV.G pseudotyping (VSV.G) or ecotropic envelope (ecotrope) and 40 ml of cell culture SN were each purified using MA/UF setup. The physical titer of the fractions was analyzed using C-type RT-activity kit and the recovery rate was calculated, respectively. n = 3, mean+SEM. * 0.05 ≥ p > 0.01; *** 0.001 ≥ p.