Skip to main content
. 2013 Jan 23;8(1):e54532. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0054532

Table 1. IP production and surface expression of wild type and mutant CCR5 receptors.

IP Production FACS analysis
CCR5 Receptor Construct Basal Stimulated Mean Fluorescence Intensity Cells gated
(CPM) (CPM) (% wild type) (%)
Wild type 2 263±417 (9) 15 684±1 198 100 86±0.5
Thr2.56(82)Lys 4 783±1 007a (9) 4 516±915 6±1.5 8±0.5
Thr2.56(82)Pro 9 004±3284a (6) 12 382±3 161 92±15 47±6.7
Thr2.56(82)Arg 2 358±373 2 827±802 19±3 51±0.8
Asp3.49(125)Ala 1 811±368 1 799±680 11±1.7 46±1.8
Asp3.49(125)Asn 1 338±338 2827±802 47±8.5 74±0.3
Arg6.32(225)Ala 1 438±360 6 197±2 550 63±10 57±11
Arg6.32(225)Asp 1 664±259 6 446±1 556 72±24 61±19
Arg6.32(225)Glu 1 808±418 6 697±2 022 43±12 69±5.0
T2.56(82)K/R6.32(225)Q 14 500±4 321a (4) 14 187±4 320 51±13 48±7.5
T2.56(82)P/R6.32(225)Q 15 540±6 929a (4) 18 038±6 700 80±21 58±7.9
a

significantly different from wild type, p<0.05.

To assess constitutive- and ligand-stimulated IP production, HEK-Gqi cells transiently expressing wild type or mutant CCR5 receptors were labeled with [H3]-myo-inositol and incubated with buffer (Basal) or MIP-1β (10−7 M, Stimulated). To assess cell surface expression of receptors HEK 293 cells transiently transfected with wild type or mutant CCR5 constructs were incubated with PE-2D7 antibody before FACS analysis. Every experiment included wild type CCR5 and mock transfected cells. Data are means ± SEM calculated from at least three independent experiments performed in duplicate.