Opposing effects of micro-CALI of M1c and MII in lamellipodial protrusion
Net displacement . | Protrusion . | Retraction . | |
|---|---|---|---|
| μm | |||
| IgG control | 2.6 ± 0.3 (42) | 2.0 ± 0.3 (19) | |
| M1c | 3.5 ± 0.3 (54)a | 1.9 ± 0.4 (27) | |
| MII | 1.7 ± 0.2 (33)a | 2.0 ± 0.2 (31) | |
Net displacement . | Protrusion . | Retraction . | |
|---|---|---|---|
| μm | |||
| IgG control | 2.6 ± 0.3 (42) | 2.0 ± 0.3 (19) | |
| M1c | 3.5 ± 0.3 (54)a | 1.9 ± 0.4 (27) | |
| MII | 1.7 ± 0.2 (33)a | 2.0 ± 0.2 (31) | |
Significant difference in protrusion relative to IgG control (P < 0.05).
The distance in μm covered by the center of each lamellipodium (at the midpoint between adjacent filopodia) was determined for the 5-min micro-CALI treatment period. The distances were averaged for all the lamellipodia in the front half of the growth cone (Net displacement). Numbers in parentheses indicate the number of lamellipodia.