Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2019 Feb 8;38:65. doi: 10.1186/s13046-019-1065-7

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

© The Author(s). 2019

Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

PMC Copyright notice

Fig. 1 — Knockdown of FUS suppressed GEC angiogenesis in U87 glioma. (a-b) The mRNA and protein expression levels of FUS in ECs and GECs were evaluated by qRT-PCR and western blot. GAPDH was used as an endogenous control. IDVs represents integrated density values. Data are presented as the means ± SD (n = 5, each group). ^**P < 0.01 vs. ECs group. (c) The effects of FUS knockdown on GEC viability were detected by the CCK-8 assay. Data are presented as the means ± SD (n = 5, each group). ^**P < 0.01 vs. FUS (−) NC group. (d) The effects of FUS knockdown on GECs were detected by the transwell assay. Data are presented as the means ± SD (n = 5, each group). ^**P < 0.01 vs. FUS (−) NC group. The scale bar represents 100 μm. (e) The effects of FUS knockdown on GECs tube formation were measured by the Matrigel tube formation assay (black arrow, tube structures; grey arrow, tube branches). Data are presented as the means ± SD (n = 5, each group). ^**P < 0.01 vs. FUS (−) NC group. The scale bar represents 100 μm. (f) The relative enrichment of circ_002136 in anti-IgG and anti-FUS was detected by an RNA-IP assay. Data are presented as the means ± SD (n = 3, each group). ^**P < 0.01 vs. anti-IgG group. (g) FUS and GAPDH protein levels immunoprecipitation with circ_002136 were evaluated by western blot. The expression levels of FUS and GAPDH proteins are shown. (h) The effects of FUS knockdown on circ_002136 expression levels were detected by qRT-PCR. Data are presented as the means ± SD (n = 5, each group). ^**P < 0.01 vs. FUS (−) NC group. (i) The effects of FUS knockdown on CDK11A expression levels were detected by qRT-PCR. Data are presented as the means ± SD (n = 5, each group)