Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 May 27.
Published in final edited form as: Cell Rep. 2021 Jan 19;34(3):108645. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.108645

Table 1.

Summary of growth Inhibition and bacterial protection phenotypes in response to treatment or pre-treatment with OMVs

Growth inhibition?a Bacterial protection?a



Treatment Pst C Pst M Pf C Pf M Pst M
Sonication Y Y Y Y Y
Salt strip (NaCl) Nb Nb Yb Yb
UV (30 min) N N N N
Frozen in LN2 and lyophilized Y N Y Y
Boiled (100°C, 2 hr) N N N N Y
Proteinase K (100 μM, 1 h, 37°C) N N N N Y/N
Combined (polymyxin, sonicate, benzonase, Proteinase K, Tween 20, boil) N N Y/Nc N Y/Nc
Organic extraction (MeOH and DCM) Y/Nd
Size exclusion on extraction pellet Y/Ne

See also Figures 2E, 2F, S5, and S6.

a

Seedlings (for growth inhibition) or 3-week-old plants (for bacterial protection) were treated with OMVs from the indicated strain and condition. OMVs were treated before application with the indicated biochemical or physical stressors. C: OMVs isolated from complete media; M: OMVs isolated from minimal media; Y: activity retained in OMVs; N: activity reduced to level of buffer-treated control; Y/N: activity reduced to a level between OMVs and buffer-treated control. –: activity not tested for these conditions.

b

Activity was also assessed for post-treatment supernatants and activity was detected in supernatant.

c

Activity was <5× Pst OMVs and greater than buffer control, but not statistically different from the negative control with treatments alone.

d

Activity was reduced compared to unfractionated 5× Pst OMVs but retained in both fractions.

e

Activity was reduced compared to unfractionated 5× Pst OMV extraction pellet, but only in the fraction containing components larger than 10 kDa.