EMBO/SourceData huggingface dataset:
Figure 8(A-F) Forebrain slices were pre-incubated for 30 min with vehicle (water) or 10 μM Myr-Pep2 or Myr-DSPL. Like Myr-DSPL (Joiner et al., 2010), Pep2 was myristoylated at its N terminus (Myr-Pep2) to make it membrane permeant. Slices were then treated with ISO (10 M, 5 min) or vehicle (water) before solubilization, ultracentrifugation, and IP of β2AR (A-C) or simultaneously α11.2 and GluA1 with a combination of corresponding antibodies within same samples (D-F).(A) Myr-Pep 2 displaced α11.2 (lane 5 vs. 3, top of blot) but not GluA1 (middle, same blot) from β2AR (bottom, same blot); the inverse was true for Myr-DSPL (lane 1 vs. 3).(B,C) For quantification, α11.2 and GluA1 immunosignals were normalized to β2AR signals (**p<0.01, ***p<0.001, One Way ANOVA).(A-F) Forebrain slices were pre-incubated for 30 min with vehicle (water) or 10 μM Myr-Pep2 or Myr-DSPL. Like Myr-DSPL (Joiner et al., 2010), Pep2 was myristoylated at its N terminus (Myr-Pep2) to make it membrane permeant. Slices were then treated with ISO (10 M, 5 min) or vehicle (water) before solubilization, ultracentrifugation, and IP of β2AR (A-C) or simultaneously α11.2 and GluA1 with a combination of corresponding antibodies within same samples (D-F).(D) Myr-Pep2 blunted ISO-induced phosphorylation of α11.2 S1700 (lane 6 vs. 4, top of blot) but not GluA1 S845 (middle, same blot); the inverse was true for Myr-DSPL (lane 2 vs. 4).(E,F) For quantification, pS1700 and pS845 immunosignals were normalized to α11.2 and GluA1 signals, respectively (***p<0.001, One Way ANOVA).(G) Representative cell-attached recordings from hippocampal neurons as in Figure 7. In interleafed experiments cultures were pre-incubated for 30 min with 10 M Myr-Pep2 or scrambled Myr-Pep2 (Myr-Pep2scr). The patch pipette contained either vehicle (H2O; control) or 1 µM ISO. The ISO induced increase in NPo was prevented by Myr-Pep2 but not Myr-Pep2scr. Arrows indicate the 0-current level (i.e. closed channel).(H) Summary plot for (G). For statistical analysis, the NPo value was determined for each recording and pooled under each condition for comparison (n=10-12 patches; *p<0.05, One Way ANOVA with Tukey post-hoc test).
Figure 9Graphs depict fEPSP initial slopes recorded from hippocampal CA1 before and after either a 5Hz/3 min (A-C) or 100Hz/1sec tetanus (D-F). Arrowheads mark onset of tetani and bars perfusion with 1 µM ISO. Inserts show sample traces immediately before (left) and ~30 min after (right) tetani.(A-C) Litter-matched WT but not conditional Cav1.2 KO mice showed PTT-LTP (**p < 0.001, one-way ANOVA).(D-F) WT as well as Cav1.2 KO mice showed NMDAR-dependent 100 Hz LTP.Graphs depict fEPSP initial slopes recorded from hippocampal CA1 before and after either a 5Hz/3 min (A-C, G-I) or 100Hz/1sec tetanus (D-F). Arrowheads mark onset of tetani and bars perfusion with 1 µM ISO and 10 µM of Myr-Pep2 or Myr-Pep2scr. Inserts show sample traces immediately before (left) and ~30 min after (right) tetani.(G-I) Myr-Pep2 but not Myr-Pep2scr blocked PTT-LTP (**p < 0.001, one-way ANOVA).
Figure 1Left: Immunofluorescence images of cGAS in the nucleus (DAPI) and cytosol (phalloidin) in BMDMos cultured at low/high density Scale bar: 50 μm. Right: Corresponding quantification of the nuclear cGAS from 6 different fields with n > 50 cells.Left: Immunofluorescence images of cGAS in the nucleus (DAPI) and cytosol (phalloidin) in BMDMos cultured with/without serum Scale bar: 50 μm. Right: Corresponding quantification of the nuclear cGAS from 6 different fields with n > 50 cells.Immunofluorescence images of cGAS in the nucleus (DAPI) and cytosol (phalloidin) in BMDMos cultured with/without Aphidicolin (Aphi) (C). Scale bar: 50 μm. Right: Corresponding quantification of the nuclear cGAS from 6 different fields with n > 50 cells.Immunoblot estimation of cGAS in nuclear/cytosolic subcellular fraction of BMDMos cultured under indicated conditions. Lamin B and α-Tubulin are nuclear and cytosolic markers respectively.Immunoblot estimation of cGAS in nuclear/cytosolic subcellular fraction of BMDMos cultured under indicated conditions. Lamin B and α-Tubulin are nuclear and cytosolic markers respectively.Immunoblot estimation of cGAS in nuclear/cytosolic subcellular fraction of BMDMos cultured under indicated conditions. Lamin B and α-Tubulin are nuclear and cytosolic markers respectively.Flow cytometric analysis of cell cycle of BMDMosFlow cytometric analysis of cell cycle of BMDMosFlow cytometric analysis of cell cycle of BMDMos
Figure 2Micronuclei (indicated by arrow head) in GFP-NLS- or GFP-hcGAS expressing HEK293 cells before (0 h) or 24 h after γ-irradiation (IR; 10 Gy). Scale bar: 10 μm (A).Micronuclei (indicated by arrow head) in GFP-NLS- or GFP-hcGAS expressing HEK293 cells before (0 h) or 24 h after γ-irradiation (IR; 10 Gy). The average MNs/cell. Graphs show Mean ± SEM (n=3 independent experiments) representing six different microscopic fields with over 200 cells.IFNB1 response in HEK293 cells stimulated with transfected plasmid DNA. Mean ± SEM of n=3 independent experiments.Micronuclei (indicated by arrow head) and cGAS staining in WT and cGAS-/- BMDMos exposed to γ-irradiation (10 Gy). Scale bar: 10 μm.Average MNs/cell in BMDMos. MN graphs show Mean ± SEM (n=3 independent experiments) representing eight different microscopic fields with over 200 cells.Cell death in WT and cGAS-/- BMDMos that were first synchronized at G2/M, then γ-irradiated (10 Gy) followed by release and analysis at indicated time points. Mean ±SD, x biological triplicates (n=3) per treatment group are shown.
Figure 3BMDMos from cGAS-/- mice exhibit enhanced DNA repair efficiency than those from WT and Sting-/- mice. (A) Representative comet tails of WT, cGAS-/- and Sting-/-BMDMos exposed to γ-irradiation (IR: 10 Gy) on ice then incubated at 37 ̊C for indicated duration. (B) Corresponding quantification of the comet tail moments from 20 different fields with n > 200 comets of 3 independent experiments.cGAS promotes micronuclei generation in BMDMos independently of STING. Confocal microscopic visualization of micronuclei (indicated by arrow head) and cGAS staining in WT, cGAS-/- and Sting-/- BMDMos exposed to γ-irradiation (10Gy). Scale bar: 10 μm.cGAS promotes micronuclei generation in BMDMos independently of STING. Average MNs/cell in corresponding representative images. Bar graphs show mean values from eight different microscopic fields with over 200 cells.γ-irradiation-induced cell death in WT, cGAS-/- BMDMosγ-irradiation-induced cell death in Sting-/- and cGAS-/- Sting-/- BMDMos (F).
Figure 4Kinetics of in vivo depletion of indicated bone marrow cells in WT mice (n=3) after γ-irradiation (9 Gy).Bone marrow cells in WT (n=3) and cGAS-/- (n=3) mice 10 hours post γ-irradiation.Bone marrow cells in Sting-/- (n=3) and cGAS-/- Sting-/- (n=3) mice 10 hours post γ-irradiation.
Figure 5Obtained results showing enhanced HR efficiency upon knockdown of endogenous cGAS in U2OS cells. Immunoblot inserts in depict knockdown efficiency of cGAS and Histone H1.2.Obtained results showing enhanced HR efficiency upon knockdown of endogenous cGAS in U2OS cells. Immunoblot inserts in depict knockdown efficiency of cGAS and Histone H1.2.Results showing the effect of hcGAS, hcGAS△cGAMP, hcGAS△DNA or hcGAS△Oligo on HR in HEK293 cells. Corresponding immunoblot inserts depict cGAS expression.Results showing the effect of hcGAS, hcGAS△cGAMP, hcGAS△DNA or hcGAS△Oligo on NHEJ in HEK293 cells. Corresponding immunoblot inserts depict cGAS expression.
Figure 6cGAS is not recruited to DSB sites: Confocal microscopic images of GFP-NLS- or GFP-hcGAS-expressing U2OS-DSB reporter cells incubated (or not) with Shield-1 and 4-OHT to induce the expression and translocation of mCherry-LacI-FokI (red) to specific DSB sites. Scale bar: 10μm. The arrowheads indicate DSB sites.cGAS does not colocalize with γ-H2AX at DSB sites: GFP-NLS- or GFP-hcGAS- expressing HEK293 cells exposed (or not) to γ-irradiation (IR: 10 Gy) then stained for γ-H2AX. Scale bar: 10 μm.Nuclear cGAS is mainly chromatin-bound and remains unaltered upon γ-irradiation. Cytosolic (cyto) and nuclear fractions of γ-irradiated (10 Gy, 30 min) BMDMos analyzed for cGAS and indicated molecules.Nuclear cGAS is mainly chromatin-bound and remains unaltered upon γ-irradiation. Cytosolic, soluble nuclear and chromatin fractions from BMDMos were immunoblotted for cGAS and indicated proteins.cGAS co-isolates with DNA repair proteins because of bound chromatin bridges. Nuclease digestion abrogates the co-isolation of cGAS and DNA repair proteins: Lysates of control (-IR) and γ-irradiated (+IR, 10 Gy, 30 min) GFP-hcGAS expressing HEK293 cells were treated (or not) with Benzonase before cGAS immunoprecipitation and analysis for indicated proteins. Agarose gel analysis of DNA in corresponding cell lysates in (E).cGAS co-isolates with DNA repair proteins because of bound chromatin bridges. Co-isolation of cGAS and DNA repair proteins depends on its binding to DNA: cGAS pulldowns along with lysate inputs of control and γ-irradiated HEK293 cells expressing GFP-hcGAS or GFP-hcGASΔDNA probed for indicated proteins.
Figure 7Confocal images of γ-irradiated GFP-NLS-, GFP-hcGAS-expressing HEK293 cells stained for RAD51 (red) with or without γ-irradiation. Scale bar: 10 μm.Pre-incubation of dsDNA with mcGAS-cat prevents D-loop formation by human RAD51, but does not affect the RAD1 activity once RAD51 filaments are bound to dsDNA. The percentage of D-loop formed in each reaction (left) was graphed as the average of triplicates ± SD.Pre-incubation of template dsDNA with hcGAScat blocks subsequent D-loop formation. The percentage of D-loop formation (below) was graphed as the average of triplicates±SD.
Figure 8Negative-stain electron micrographs of cGAS-dsDNA complexes following incubation of dsDNA with indicated cGAS variants. Scale bar: 100 nm.Effect of indicated hcGAS variants on D-loop formation when pre-incubated with dsDNA. Percentage of D-loop formed in each reaction (left) graphed as the average of triplicates± SD.DR-GFP assay showing that hcGASΔDNA-Y215E is impaired in HR inhibition.hcGASΔDNA-Y215E but not hcGASΔcGAMP has a decreased affinity to dsDNA24.hcGASΔDNA-Y215E and hcGASΔcGAMP are defective in synthase activity.Negative-stain electron micrographs showing that hcGAScat-ΔDNA-Y215E is defective in inducing cGAS-dsDNA complexes. Scale bar: 100 nm.Effect of indicated hcGAS variants on D-loop formation.
Figure 1(E) Representative photos of iWAT, eWAT and BAT from Ftoflox/flox and FtoAKO mice fed a HFD. Scale bar, 1 cm. (F) Representative H&E staining of iWAT, eWAT and BAT from Ftoflox/flox and FtoAKO mice fed a HFD. Scale bar, 200 μm. ( (I-K) Serum levels of glucose (I), triglyceride (J) and free fatty acid (FFA) (K) in Ftoflox/flox and FtoAKO mice fed a HFD followed by fasting. Data information: The data were presented as the mean ± SD (n = 6). Statistical analyses were performed using Student t‐test. ∗p < 0.05, ∗∗p < 0.01, ∗∗∗p < 0.001.
Figure 2(A) O2 consumption of 16-week-old Ftoflox/flox and FtoAKO mice fed a HFD. White and gray areas in the graphs indicate day and night, respectively. (B) CO2 generation of 16-week-old Ftoflox/flox and FtoAKO mice fed a HFD. White and gray areas in the graphs indicate day and night, respectively. ( Data information: The data were presented as the mean ± SD of n = 6 mice per group or triplicate tests (n = 3). Statistical analyses were performed using Student t‐test. ∗∗p < 0.01, ∗∗∗p < 0.001.(F) qPCR analysis of genes involved in thermogenesis, mitochondrial biogenesis and adipogenesis in iWAT of Ftoflox/flox and FtoAKO mice.(G) Western blot analysis of the protein levels of UCP1, PPARGC1A and PPARG in iWAT of Ftoflox/flox and FtoAKO mice.(I) Immunofluorescence detection of UCP1 in iWAT from Ftoflox/flox and FtoAKO mice following 6 days cold exposure (4°C). Scale bar, 20 μm.(M) Western blot analysis of UCP1, PPARGC1A and PPARG protein levels in differentiated beige adipocytes described in (J).(N) Immunofluorescent staining of UCP1 in differentiated beige adipocytes described in (J). Scale bar, 20 μm.
Figure 3(G) Western blot analysis of the protein levels of FTO, HIF1A, UCP1, PPARGC1A and PPARG in differentiated beige adipocytes described in (F).
Figure 4(C) The O2 consumption rate (OCR) in differentiated beige adipocytes from 3T3-L1 cells overexpressing Vec or HIF1A plasmid. The average basal and maximal respiration rates are shown in right panel. Data information: The data were presented as the mean ± SD of triplicate tests (n = 3). Statistical analyses were performed using Student t‐test. ∗p < 0.05, ∗∗p < 0.01, ∗∗∗p < 0.001.(G) qPCR analysis of genes involved in thermogenesis in differentiated beige adipocytes described in (C). (H) qPCR analysis of genes involved in thermogenesis in differentiated beige adipocytes described in (D). ( Data information: The data were presented as the mean ± SD of triplicate tests (n = 3). Statistical analyses were performed using Student t‐test. ∗p < 0.05, ∗∗p < 0.01, ∗∗∗p < 0.001.(I) Immunofluorescent staining of UCP1 in differentiated beige adipocytes described in (D). Scale bar, 20 μm.
Figure 5(C) Distribution of m6A peaks in Hif1a mRNA transcript in siCtrl and siFto 3T3-L1 cells. Blue boxes represent exons, and blue lines represent introns. The m6A peaks were in the dashed red box.(D) Methylated RNA immunoprecipitation (MeRIP)-qPCR analysis of m6A levels of Hif1a mRNA in siCtrl and siFto 3T3-L1 cells. Data information: The data were presented as the mean ± SD of triplicate tests (n = 3). Statistical analyses were performed using Student t‐test.∗∗p < 0.01, ∗∗∗p < 0.001.(H) Western blot analysis of the protein levels of HIF1A, UCP1, PPARGC1A, PPARG and GFP in 3T3-L1 cells infected with lentiviruses pCDHpuro expressing Vec, WT- or MUT-HIF1A.
Figure 6(A) Western blot analysis of the protein levels of YTHDF1, YTHDF2 and HIF1A in siCtrl, siYthdf1 and siYthdf2 3T3-L1 cells.(G) Polysome profiling of 3T3-L1 cells overexpressing Vec or YTHDC2 plasmid. (H) qPCR analysis of mRNA levels of Hif1a in 40-80S or polysome fraction in 3T3-L1 cells overexpressing Vec or YTHDC2 plasmid. (I) Polysome profiling of siCtrl and siYthdc2 3T3-L1 cells. (J) qPCR analysis of mRNA levels of Hif1a in 40-80S or polysome fraction in siCtrl and siYthdc2 3T3-L1 cells. Data information: The data were presented as the mean ± SD of triplicate tests (n = 3). Statistical analyses were performed using Student t‐test.∗∗p < 0.01, ∗∗∗p < 0.001.
Figure 1Hsp12-GFP accumulation (Y axis) vs. time (X axis) in response to different levels of KCl stress. Points reflect the measured values, and lines correspond to best model fit.Hsp12-GFP accumulation (Y axis) vs. time (X axis) at 0.4M KCl.Representation of the experiments shown in (B,C) in parameter space. Connected line shows the progression in the response to increasing KCl levels The inferred tonparameter (Y axis) vs. KCl concentration (X axis) of the KCl gradient experiment The inferred total open time - toff− ton(Y axis) vs. the inferred production rate (X axis) of the KCl gradient experiment
Figure 2Summary of Hsp12-GFP dynamics single mutant screen. 68 mutants were divided into three groups: increased/decreased/did not change the total GFP produced. Each group was independently hierarchically clustered. The values shown are the Z-Scores of each parameter: ton- response onset time; production rate; total open time - length of transcriptional window (toff − ton); Basal GFP - GFP levels measured before exposure to stress; Delta GFP - amount of GFP produced throughout the experiment (Max GFP - Basal GFP).mRNA levels of HSP12 (Y axis) as a function of time (X axis) in six representative strains.Comparison of RNA levels to protein levels. X axis is the sum over the HSP12 mRNA counts (see D). Y axis is the maximum over the Hsp12-GFP values. The red line indicates the best linear fit.Comparing the total open time parameter inferred from mRNA data (X axis) to the one inferred from protein data (Y axis).production/transcription rates.Time-lapse microscopy of Hsp12-GFP in response to stress (0.4M KCl). Examples of raw images (top) and traces of individual cells (bottom). Traces are colored according to their basal GFP level.Scatter plot showing the production rate estimated from single traces vs. the production rate estimated from the population average. Each point represents a different yeast strain.
Figure 3Estimated parameters (median over repeats) of all ~1600 double mutant strains. The color represents the total Hsp12-GFP produced. The same amount of GFP can be produced with multiple parameter combinations. The ellipses illustrate iso-expression areas in the graph. Three examples of individual strains (marked in B) with nearly the same total expression but dramatically different dynamics.Illustration of the genetic interaction trends of individual mutants. For each single mutant we plot the median of all the double mutants that contain it (purple dots). The gray dots are all individual double mutant strains (B).Illustration of the interactions of Δhog1 in the production rate parameter. Shown the production rate of the single mutant (X axis) versus the production rate of the double mutant with Δhog1 (Y axis). The gray line marks the Hog1 single mutant levels. Points close to the gray line are ones where the value of the double mutant is close to the value of Δhog1 and defined as epistasis of Δhog1 (pink dots).Illustration of the interactions of Δhog1 for the total open time parameter.
Figure 4Epistatic interactions of Δmck1 in the production rate parameterEpistatic interactions of Δmck1 in the total open time parameterUpper: HSP12 mRNA in response to osmotic stress (0.4M KCl). Lower: Estimate of Msn2/4 dependent production of HSP12 mRNA over time (difference between WT and Δmsn2Δmsn4 production profiles, Figure EV4A, Methods).   Δmck1 effect on the response of all stress genes. The integral over mRNA values in WT strain (X axis) vs. the integral in the Δmck1 strain (Y values). The inset shows the integral for the HSP12 gene.   Heatmap showing expression of stress responsive genes in WT and two mutants over eight timepoints (See 2C). Each gene is presented relative to its pre-stress level and normalized by the median over WT values to visualize the dynamic range in all genes. The genes are separated into MSN dependent and independent genes (Figure EV4B). The MSN-dependent genes are sorted based on the onset time to three groups (Early, Average and Late onset).The behaviour of early and late onset genes. Similar to (C) but showing the average over the genes in each group.
Figure 5Msn2-GFP localization following stress (0.4M KCl) in selected strains. Top: The percentage of nuclear cells (Y axis) over time (X axis). Bottom: count of the number of nuclear import events in live-cell time-lapse microscopy at the two relevant periods.addition of the Δmsn5 strain.addition of the Δmsn5 strain.
Figure 1(A) Representative images of a PDGFB tumour: H&E on the right to identify the tumour, an adjacent section stained for Iba1 (red), p-S6 (green) and DAPI (blue) at the centre and the region selection for quantification on the left (non-tumour in light blue, tumour edge in orange and tumour core in dark blue).(B) Representative images of core, edge and adjacent non-tumour brain tissue for Iba1, p-S6 and DAPI staining in Pten-/-p53-/- (right) and GL261 (left) tumours. Percentage of Iba1+ cells co-expressing p-S6 in the three defined regions. Five high grade glioma models were analysed - GL261 (n=3), PDGFB (n=3), Ntv-a;PDGFB+shp53 (n=2), Pten-/-p53-/- (n=3), and Pten-/-p53-/-Idh1mut (n=3) (mean ±SEM; Two-Way ANOVA Tukey test).(F,G) Expression levels of (F) Rps6 and (G) Eif4ebp1 in healthy versus GL261 microglia and macrophage (n=3; mean ±SEM, likelihood ratio test in edgeR).
Figure 2Signalling was analysed in microglia by immunoblotting of whole cell lysates collected at 4hr (B and normalised against non-phosphorylated protein and vinculin analysed on the same blot. Each treatment (mNSC-CM, Pten-/-p53-/- mGIC-CM, Pten-/-p53-/- mGIC-CM+Torin was normalised to unconditioned control (n=3; mean ±SEM, Two-Way ANOVA Tukey test). *p≤0.05, **p≤0.01, ***p≤0.001 comparing mGICPten-/-;p53-/--CM versus mGICPten-/-;p53-/--CM +inhibitor.Flow cytometry analysis was carried out in microglia for (C) p-S6 S240/244 Each treatment (mNSC-CM, Pten-/-p53-/- mGIC-CM, Pten-/-p53-/- mGIC-CM+Torin was normalised to unconditioned control (n=3; mean ±SEM, Two-Way ANOVA Tukey test). *p≤0.05, **p≤0.01, ***p≤0.001 comparing mGICPten-/-;p53-/--CM versus mGICPten-/-;p53-/--CM +inhibitor.Signalling was analysed in microglia by immunoblotting of whole cell lysates collected at 4hr and normalised against non-phosphorylated protein and vinculin analysed on the same blot. Each treatment (mNSC-CM, Pten-/-p53-/- mGIC-CM, Pten-/-p53-/- mGIC-CM+Torin was normalised to unconditioned control (n=3; mean ±SEM, Two-Way ANOVA Tukey test). *p≤0.05, **p≤0.01, ***p≤0.001 comparing mGICPten-/-;p53-/--CM versus mGICPten-/-;p53-/--CM +inhibitor.Flow cytometry analysis was carried out in microglia for (E) p-4EBP1 T37/46 Each treatment (mNSC-CM, Pten-/-p53-/- mGIC-CM, Pten-/-p53-/- mGIC-CM+Torin was normalised to unconditioned control (n=3; mean ±SEM, Two-Way ANOVA Tukey test). *p≤0.05, **p≤0.01, ***p≤0.001 comparing mGICPten-/-;p53-/--CM versus mGICPten-/-;p53-/--CM +inhibitor.Signalling was analysed in microglia by immunoblotting of whole cell lysates collected at 4hr and normalised against non-phosphorylated protein and vinculin analysed on the same blot. Each treatment (mNSC-CM, Pten-/-p53-/- mGIC-CM, Pten-/-p53-/- mGIC-CM+Torin was normalised to unconditioned control (n=3; mean ±SEM, Two-Way ANOVA Tukey test). *p≤0.05, **p≤0.01, ***p≤0.001 comparing mGICPten-/-;p53-/--CM versus mGICPten-/-;p53-/--CM +inhibitor.Flow cytometry analysis was carried out in microglia for (G) p-AKT S473; Each treatment (mNSC-CM, Pten-/-p53-/- mGIC-CM, Pten-/-p53-/- mGIC-CM+Torin, was normalised to unconditioned control (n=3; mean ±SEM, Two-Way ANOVA Tukey test). *p≤0.05, **p≤0.01, ***p≤0.001 comparing mGICPten-/-;p53-/--CM versus mGICPten-/-;p53-/--CM +inhibitor.Signalling was analysed in microglia by immunoblotting of whole cell lysates collected at 0.5hr (H) and normalised against non-phosphorylated protein and vinculin analysed on the same blot. Each treatment (mNSC-CM, Pten-/-p53-/- mGIC-CM, Pten-/-p53-/- mGIC-CM +LY) was normalised to unconditioned control (n=3; mean ±SEM, Two-Way ANOVA Tukey test). *p≤0.05, **p≤0.01, ***p≤0.001 comparing mGICPten-/-;p53-/--CM versus mGICPten-/-;p53-/--CM +inhibitor.Flow cytometry analysis was carried out in microglia for (I) p-AKT T308. Each treatment (mNSC-CM, Pten-/-p53-/- mGIC-CM, Pten-/-p53-/- mGIC-CM+ LY) was normalised to unconditioned control (n=3; mean ±SEM, Two-Way ANOVA Tukey test). *p≤0.05, **p≤0.01, ***p≤0.001 comparing mGICPten-/-;p53-/--CM versus mGICPten-/-;p53-/--CM +inhibitor.
Figure 3(B) Survival analysis for Cx3cr1-Rheb1Δ/Δ (n=7) and Rheb1fl/fl (n=7) mice. Chi square test.(C) Representative images and quantification of the tumour volume with MRI of Rheb1fl/fl (n=8) compared to Cx3cr1-Rheb1Δ/Δ (n=8) mice. (mean ±SEM; Unpaired parametric t test).(D) H&E staining showing representative histological features (overview and high magnification of microvascular proliferation) of Rheb1fl/fl and Cx3cr1-Rheb1Δ/Δ GL261 tumours. Scale bar is 125 μm (top, H&E) and 80 μm (all other images)(E) Percentage of GFP+ CD45- GL261 tumour cells in Cx3cr1-Rheb1Δ/Δ (n=5) and Rheb1fl/fl (n=7) tumours, with representative FACS plot (mean ±SEM; Unpaired parametric t test).