Proteomics Clin. Appl. 2019, 4, 1800129 https://doi.org/10.1002/prca.201800129 The figure legends for figure 3 is the legend intended for figure 4, and the figure legend for figure 4 is the legend intended for figure 3. 3 FIGURE (Figure presented.) ((correct legend)): Assessment of Anti-carbohydrate Antibodies in Mechanical Valve and GFBP Valve Patients. (A) Representative western blot, a: ladder b: native BP protein probed with mechanical valve patient serum c: de-glycosylated BP protein probed with mechanical valve patient serum d: native BP protein probed with GFBP valve patient serum e: de-glycosylated BP protein probed with GFBP valve patient serum. (B) Densitometry analysis of western blots. (C) alpha-gal ELISA for antibodies against alpha-gal epitope in GFBP valve, Mechanical and healthy control patients. All groups have n=6 biological replicates (*p<0.05). 4 FIGURE (Figure presented.) ((correct legend)): Graphical Representation of Identified Antigen Fold Changes Between Mechanical and GFBP Valve Recipients. Dotted line differentiates between BP antigens found to be upregulated in the GFBP group (left) versus the mechanical group (right). The columns represent average spectral counts for each protein with error bars accounting for standard deviation. The colored scale beneath the x-axis indicates the fold change for each protein (green indicating upregulation in GFBP recipients, red in mechanical valve recipients). All groups have n=6 biological replicates and all protein differences are significant (p<0.05). Higher resolution Figures 3 and 4 are below along with the correct legends.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Clinical Biochemistry