Table 1.
Canonical Pathways Identified in Microvesicle Samples.
| Ingenuity Canonical Pathways | -log(p-value) | Ratio | Secreted infectious microvesicle (ImV) sample from PV-infected cells |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identified Molecules | |||
| Glycolysis I | 8.33 | 0.208 | ALDOA,ENO1,GAPDH,PKM,TPI1 |
| RhoGDI Signaling | 7.65 | 0.0452 | ACTB,ACTG1,CD44,CFL1,EZR,ITGB1,MSN,RHOA |
| Virus Entry via Endocytic Pathways | 6.37 | 0.0556 | ACTB,ACTG1,CD55,FOLR1,ITGB1,TFRC |
| Leukocyte Extravasation Signaling | 6.08 | 0.0361 | ACTB,ACTG1,CD44,EZR,ITGB1,MSN,RHOA |
| RhoA Signaling | 6.08 | 0.0496 | ACTB,ACTG1,CFL1,EZR,MSN,RHOA |
| Actin Cytoskeleton Signaling | 5.8 | 0.0327 | ACTB,ACTG1,CFL1,EZR,ITGB1,MSN,RHOA |
| Glucocorticoid Receptor Signaling | 5.55 | 0.024 | ACTB,ANXA1,HSPA8,KRT1,KRT10,KRT14,KRT2,KRT9 |
| Signaling by Rho Family GTPases | 5.46 | 0.029 | ACTB,ACTG1,CFL1,EZR,ITGB1,MSN,RHOA |
| Mechanisms of Viral Exit from Host Cells | 5.36 | 0.0976 | ACTB,ACTG1,CHMP4B,PDCD6IP |
| Germ Cell-Sertoli Cell Junction Signaling | 5.26 | 0.0359 | ACTB,ACTG1,CFL1,ITGB1,RHOA,TUBB |
| Clathrin-mediated Endocytosis Signaling | 4.9 | 0.0311 | ACTB,ACTG1,HSPA8,ITGB1,TFRC,UBA52 |
| Gluconeogenesis I | 4.4 | 0.12 | ALDOA,ENO1,GAPDH |
| Caveolar-mediated Endocytosis Signaling | 4.36 | 0.0548 | ACTB,ACTG1,CD55,ITGB1 |
| Pyruvate Fermentation to Lactate | 4.15 | 0.4 | LDHA,LDHB |
| Regulation of Actin-based Motility by Rho | 4.04 | 0.0455 | ACTB,CFL1,ITGB1,RHOA |
| Ingenuity Canonical Pathways | -log(p-value) | Ratio | Secreted mock microvesicle (MmV) sample from mock-infected cells (control) |
| Identified Molecules | |||
| Glucocorticoid Receptor Signaling | 6.44 | 0.012 | ACTB,KRT1,KRT10,KRT2 |
| Mechanisms of Viral Exit from Host Cells | 4.4 | 0.0488 | ACTB,ACTG1 |
| MSP-RON Signaling Pathway | 4.08 | 0.0339 | ACTB,ACTG1 |
A subset of the proteins detected by mass spectrometry is shown, selected based on analysis that identifies significantly represented cellular pathways. Cellular pathways were identified by the likelihood, p, that the presence of detected proteins is not due to random chance, as measured by -log (p)>4 (see Methods for further details). ‘Ratio’ is the number of proteins from that pathway that were identified in the samples, divided by the total number of pathway proteins. Only proteins identified in both experimental repeats were included in the analysis.