Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Mar 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Immunol. 2017 Jan 16;198(5):1985–1994. doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1502609

Figure 8. Impact of bacterial viability, antecedent bacterial infection, and bacterial spp. on ROS production.

Figure 8

A) Increased ROS production as measured by the DCF assay is observed in response to paraformaldehyde killed Bc in comparison to live Bc in CF (P value = 0.028) and non-CF MDM s (P value = 0.006) n=3. B) Summed end-point analysis of 8A experiments, results are expressed as % ROS production at 2h of CF MDMs relative to non-CF MDMs with B. cenocepacia. C) Burkholderia species decrease ROS production as measured by the DCF assay in response to PMA in both CF (P value = 0.05) and non-CF MDMs (P value = 0.0003) when infected for 1 h prior to PMA exposure. n=4. D) Summed end-point analysis of 8C experiments, results are expressed as % ROS production at 2h of CF MDMs relative to non-CF MDMs with PMA. E) CF and non CF MDMs have equal ROS production in response to 30 min infection with Pseudomonas aeruginosa (Pa), as measured by the DCF assay. P value = 0.70, n=3. F) Summed end-point analysis of 8E experiments, results are expressed as % ROS production at 2h of CF MDMs relative to non-CF MDMs with P. aeruginosa.