Figure 3. Effect of actin perturbation on membrane microelasticity and ability to capture IgG-opsonized particles. (A and B) The microelasticity of the membrane of control or drug-treated RAW cells was assessed by atomic force microscopy. Representative force curves illustrating the deflection of the cantilever after contact with the cell surface are shown in A and quantitation of multiple force curves in B. Data in B are mean slopes ± SEM obtained probing a minimum of 15 individual cells at 3 distinct sites/cell, from three independent experiments. (C) Representative DIC images depicting the morphology of control and latrunculin B–treated RAW macrophages; bar, 18 µm. (D) Quantitation of the effect of latrunculin B on particle binding. Data are presented as a binding index normalized to the vehicle control and are means ± SEM of three experiments, each counting at least 150 macrophages per condition.
Figure 3.

Effect of actin perturbation on membrane microelasticity and ability to capture IgG-opsonized particles. (A and B) The microelasticity of the membrane of control or drug-treated RAW cells was assessed by atomic force microscopy. Representative force curves illustrating the deflection of the cantilever after contact with the cell surface are shown in A and quantitation of multiple force curves in B. Data in B are mean slopes ± SEM obtained probing a minimum of 15 individual cells at 3 distinct sites/cell, from three independent experiments. (C) Representative DIC images depicting the morphology of control and latrunculin B–treated RAW macrophages; bar, 18 µm. (D) Quantitation of the effect of latrunculin B on particle binding. Data are presented as a binding index normalized to the vehicle control and are means ± SEM of three experiments, each counting at least 150 macrophages per condition.

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal