2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.fsi.2022.08.023
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

CD45 in ocular tissues during larval and juvenile stages and early stages of V. anguillarum infection in young lumpfish (Cyclopterus lumpus)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

1
13
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5

Relationship

2
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
1
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Western blotting for spotted wolffish PCNA, CD45, Sox9 and Tubulin further validated the utility of the panel of anti-teleost and/or anti-mammalian monoclonal antibody reagents we used to obtain the results on spotted wolffish tissues herein. Although there were differences in the molecular weights of spotted wolffish versus lumpfish anti-CD45 immunoreactive bands on western blotting, these differences could be due to either species specific differential splicing or posttranslational modifications as we have described previously for sea bass versus lumpfish CD45 and as others have described in other species 4,45 . The Basic Local Alignment Search Tool at National Center for Biotechnology Information (BLAST) indicated 94.8% and 90.7% protein sequence identities for seabass CD45 and Sox9 compared to the lumpfish and sablefish (Anoploploma fibria) genomes, respectively, which were used as a proxies for spotted wolffish in the absence of spotted wolfish genomic information.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 53%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Western blotting for spotted wolffish PCNA, CD45, Sox9 and Tubulin further validated the utility of the panel of anti-teleost and/or anti-mammalian monoclonal antibody reagents we used to obtain the results on spotted wolffish tissues herein. Although there were differences in the molecular weights of spotted wolffish versus lumpfish anti-CD45 immunoreactive bands on western blotting, these differences could be due to either species specific differential splicing or posttranslational modifications as we have described previously for sea bass versus lumpfish CD45 and as others have described in other species 4,45 . The Basic Local Alignment Search Tool at National Center for Biotechnology Information (BLAST) indicated 94.8% and 90.7% protein sequence identities for seabass CD45 and Sox9 compared to the lumpfish and sablefish (Anoploploma fibria) genomes, respectively, which were used as a proxies for spotted wolffish in the absence of spotted wolfish genomic information.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 53%
“…We described previously that the CD45 phosphatase domains are very conserved between taxa. Although the R0 and ABC domains are not typically conserved between species and are in different fish clusters between lumpfish and seabass, there are still similarities in this domain between lumpfish and seabass which supports antibody cross reaction with spotted wolffish 4 . Finally, our IHC validation experiments clearly show DLT22 antibody anti-CD45 staining in spotted wolffish head kidney tissue where one would expect such staining in the significant immune lineage parenchymal cell component in this primary lymphoid organ but not in spotted wolffish muscle tissue where one would not expect any appreciable immune lineage cell component in the parenchymal muscle tissue (Supplemental Fig.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 3 more Smart Citations