Skip to main content
. 2015 Jun 4;10(6):e0129306. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0129306

Fig 2. Distribution of ezrin and its variants in sub-cellular fraction.

Fig 2

Cellular fractions were prepared from OK cells and equal amounts of proteins (50 μg/lane) from a membrane-enriched fraction (P, 100,000 x g pellet) and cytosol (S, 100,000 x g supernatant) were blotted and probed with anti-total ezrin. A: One of the immunoblots is shown. GFP = transfected mEGFP tagged ezrin (Ezrin-GFP) and Endo = endogenous ezrin. B: Statistical analysis of signal intensity ratios relative to the immuno-detected band in S and P is reported. The signal of total ezrin in S plus P fractions was defined as equal to 100% for each condition and results are expressed as percentage of total ezrin in the P vs. S fraction. Antigen signals were normalized to β-actin. Bars and error bars represent the means ± standard errors (SE), respectively (4 experiments per condition). *P<0.05/** P<0.01 ANOVA, the membrane fraction of tagged ezrin in the presented groups compared to the membrane fraction of tagged ezrin in cells transfected with Ezrin-WT. ■P<0.05 ANOVA, membrane fraction of endogenous ezrin in the presented groups compared to the membrane fraction of endogenous ezrin in cells transfected with Ezrin-WT. $$P<0.01 ANOVA membrane fraction of tagged ezrin in Ezrin-PIP2- compared to Ezrin-PIP2- T/D transfected cells.