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

. 2020 Apr 19;8(2):190. doi: 10.3390/vaccines8020190

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

© 2020 by the authors.

Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

PMC Copyright notice

Specific antibody response in mice immunized with NLPs. (a) Mice immunization schedule: Groups of six C57BL/6 mice were immunized s.c. with three doses 14 days apart with NLPs (10 µg/dose) in the presence of the adjuvant Poly (I:C). The antibody response was then analyzed according to the timeline described. (b) Antibody subclasses against each NLP were analyzed, and the IgG1/IgG2c ratios are expressed below the graph. (c) The elicited Abs specifically recognized the central repeats of the three allelic variants, as shown by the assays for the repeats fused to flagellin FliC (FliC-PvCSP-repeats) or N-C-terminal regions (FliC-No repeats) and Mumps-NP after three doses. All results are expressed as the arithmetic mean titers of each group (log₁₀ ± SEM) and were statistically compared using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s test. Significant differences between groups are denoted on the graph: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, and **** p < 0.0001. Non-significant (ns) differences are indicated (p > 0.05).

Specific antibody response in mice immunized with NLPs. (a) Mice immunization schedule: Groups of six C57BL/6 mice were immunized s.c. with three doses 14 days apart with NLPs (10 µg/dose) in the presence of the adjuvant Poly (I:C). The antibody response was then analyzed according to the timeline described. (b) Antibody subclasses against each NLP were analyzed, and the IgG1/IgG2c ratios are expressed below the graph. (c) The elicited Abs specifically recognized the central repeats of the three allelic variants, as shown by the assays for the repeats fused to flagellin FliC (FliC-PvCSP-repeats) or N-C-terminal regions (FliC-No repeats) and Mumps-NP after three doses. All results are expressed as the arithmetic mean titers of each group (log₁₀ ± SEM) and were statistically compared using one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s test. Significant differences between groups are denoted on the graph: * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001, and **** p < 0.0001. Non-significant (ns) differences are indicated (p > 0.05).