M. tuberculosis and SR-B1 Figure 1. Identification of SR-B1 as a receptor for mycobacteria. NIH3T3 cells stably transfected with empty vector pFBneo (negative control), SR-B1 or SIGNR1 (positive control), respectively, were incubated with BCG-GFP (A) or BCG-lux (B) and assessed for binding by fluorescence microscopy or luciferase activity, respectively. Shown is the x-fold increase of luciferase activity compared to vector control which was set as 1. Experiments were performed in triplicate and normalised to cell number by CFSE staining. (C) Western Blot showing expression of SR-B1 in various untransfected cell lines as indicated. Cellular lysates from rat liver were included as a control, and GAPDH served as loading control. (D) FACS analysis of R6F cells stably transduced with pFB (vector control), SR-B1 or SIGNR1, and stained with anti-SR-B1 or anti-SIGNRI, as indicated. (E) FACS assay showing binding/ uptake of DiI-LDL to R6F cells stably expressing pFB (vector control), SR-B1 or SIGNR1. (F) Binding of FITC-labelled zymosan to R6F cells stably expressing pFB (vector control), SR-B1 or SIGNR1, as quantified by fluorometry. Shown is the x-fold increase of fluorescence compared to vector control which was set as 1. Experiments were performed in triplicate and normalised to cell number by CFSE staining. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0008448.g001 PLoS ONE | www.plosone.org 3 December 2009 | Volume 4 | Issue 12 | e8448