Skip to main content
. 2022 Sep 2;121(20):3950–3961. doi: 10.1016/j.bpj.2022.08.033

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Ameboid migration of BMDCs with (WT) or without (KO) vimentin. (A and B) Top and side views of the 1D microchannels and 2D confining roof setup. (C) Top: scheme of the lymph node homing assay. Bottom: representative phase contrast (left) and fluorescence (right) microscopy images, which are used to count the fluorescently labeled WT and KO cells that reached the lymph node. Green arrows indicate a KO cell that was injected into the footpad of the mouse. (D) Violin plots of migration speed v of WT and KO cells in 1D (3 independent experiments with 1139 total tracks for WT and 562 for KO cells) and 2D (3 independent experiments with 2428 total tracks for WT and 2409 for KO cells) setups. The horizontal lines indicate the medians. Symbols represent the mean values of individual experiments to incorporate the variability from independent experiments (55). (E) Proportion (%) of migrating WT and KO cells in 1D (5 independent experiments) and 2D (3 independent experiments) setups. Symbols denote the mean values of individual experiments. The data in (D) and (E) are also available in Table S1. (F) Proportions (%) of injected WT and KO cells arriving at a lymph node in WT (WT/WT and KO/WT) or KO (WT/KO and KO/KO) mice (WT/WT: n = 5 mice; KO/WT: n = 4 mice; WT/KO: n = 4 mice; KO/KO: n = 5 mice). Symbols represent the mean values for each mouse. The data in (E) and (F) represent mean ± standard error. Statistical analysis in (D) and (E) is performed using a t test over all data points. p<0.05, p<0.001; n.s., not significant. To see this figure in color, go online.