Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2022 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: Nat Immunol. 2022 Mar 28;23(4):581–593. doi: 10.1038/s41590-022-01158-6

Extended Data Fig. 7. Background doublet MFI is negligible compared to protein expression.

Extended Data Fig. 7

(a – d): FMO controls showing the increase in MFI of Podoplanin (a), CD31 (b), Lyve-1 (c), and PDL-1 (d) of doublets relative to singlets due to background is negligible relative to actual protein expression. n = 4 mice per group; data are represented as mean ± standard error of the mean. For Podoplanin MFI (a), singlet FMO vs. doublet FMO, p > 0.9999, singlet FMO vs. EAE singlets, p = 0.0055, singlet FMO vs. EAE doublets, p < 0.0001, doublet FMO vs. EAE singlets, p = 0.0057, doublet FMO vs. EAE doublets, p < 0.0001, EAE singlets vs. EAE doublets, p = 0.0016; for CD31 MFI (b), singlet FMO vs. doublet FMO, p = 0.0130, singlet FMO vs. EAE singlets, p < 0.0001, singlet FMO vs. EAE doublets, p < 0.0001, doublet FMO vs. EAE singlets, p < 0.0001, doublet FMO vs. EAE doublets, p < 0.0001, EAE singlets vs. EAE doublets, p < 0.0001; for Lyve-1 MFI (c), singlet FMO vs. doublet FMO, p = 0.0182, singlet FMO vs. EAE singlets, p < 0.0001, singlet FMO vs. EAE doublets, p < 0.0001, doublet FMO vs. EAE singlets, p < 0.0001, doublet FMO vs. EAE doublets, p < 0.0001, EAE singlets vs. EAE doublets, p = 0.7736; for PD-L1 MFI (d), singlet FMO vs. doublet FMO, p = 0.9828, singlet FMO vs. EAE singlets, p = 0.0003, singlet FMO vs. EAE doublets, p < 0.0001, doublet FMO vs. EAE singlets, p = 0.0005, doublet FMO vs. EAE doublets, p < 0.0001, EAE singlets vs. EAE doublets, p < 0.0001; one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s post-hoc multiple comparisons test.