Skip to main content
. 2021 Oct 6;17(10):e1009969. doi: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1009969

Fig 5. ΔPFA iRBCs display negligible cytoadherence and lower surface exposed PfEMP1.

Fig 5

A) ΔPFA displays negligible cytoadherence and lower PfEMP1 surface exposure than CS2. CS2 and ΔPFA were assayed to test their ability to adhere to immobilised CSA in Petri dishes using microscopic counting of the cells. Cytoadhesion strength is expressed relative to CS2. Results are shown for six binding assays. B) Analysis of PfEMP1 surface exposure via flow cytometry. IRBCs were stained with DAPI and αVAR2CSA antiserum followed by a Cy3-coupled secondary antibody. ΔPFAs have lower PfEMP1 surface exposure than CS2 in six independent experiments. C, D) Expression of a PFA variant featuring a mutated HPD motif in the cell line ΔPFA[QPD::HA] does not complement reduction in knob abundance (C) and knob deformation (D) observed in ΔPFA. IRBC were purified and imaged via SEM. Knobs were then counted and grouped into three categories.