Skip to main content
. 2018 Aug 1;7:e33051. doi: 10.7554/eLife.33051

Figure 4. Establishing fidelity of clonal development in CLNW observed GC.

Figure 4.

(A) Schematic overview of experimental approach for generation and analysis of CD45.2 Aicda-Cre-Confetti and CD45.2 Aicda-Cre-Confetti 564 mixed BM chimeras. Experiments conducted on two independent preparations with two independent mice each. (B) Overview of fidelity of the window imaging model. The frequency of most (first) dominant colors observed in individual mice between GCs in the CLNW as compared to the explanted contralateral LN observed ex vivo. These observations are shown in both the average (bar with standard error) as well as individual values plotted per the key for both NPCGG and 564 at early (day 11/12) and later (day 24/25) times. (C) Comparing the frequency of most (first) predominant colors observed in individual mice between GCs in the CLNW as compared to the contralateral LN observed ex vivo. Both NP-CGG and 564 comparisons are included and a linear regression is fitted, demonstrating a beta coefficient overlapping with unity, 1.04 (0.99–1.08). The mean of an average of 4.1 GC per LN for each mouse at each time point, for both NP-CGG and 564, is indicated by each point. (D) Similar to (C) except comparing the frequency of the most and second most predominant colors as observed ex vivo from the contralateral LN and in vivo in the CLNW. Regression line with beta coefficient overlapping unity, 0.99 (0.96–1.02). (E) Similar to (C) except comparing the divergence index for color composition by GC as observed ex vivo from the contralateral and in vivo in the CLNW. Regression line with beta coefficient overlapping unity, 0.92 (0.55–1.30). (F–G) Representative images used for quantification of color between CLNW observed (top) and explant imaged (bottom) within the same mouse. (H–I) As in (F–G) but a separate mouse. (J–K) As in (F–G) but a separate mouse.

Figure 4—source data 1. Comparison of CLWN and explant derived data to calculate relative frequency, dominance, divergence index.
DOI: 10.7554/eLife.33051.013