hbd1 (Novus Biologicals)
Structured Review

Hbd1, supplied by Novus Biologicals, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 94/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/result/hbd1/product/Novus Biologicals
Average 94 stars, based on 1 article reviews
Images
1) Product Images from "PM2.5 Causes Increased Bacterial Invasion by Affecting HBD1 Expression in the Lung"
Article Title: PM2.5 Causes Increased Bacterial Invasion by Affecting HBD1 Expression in the Lung
Journal: Journal of Immunology Research
doi: 10.1155/2024/6622950
Figure Legend Snippet: Expression of HBD1 at different conditions within the cell model. (a) ELISA was used to detect the levels of secretory HBD1 in the supernatants of HBE cell cultures in the control, PM2.5, PAO1, and PM2.5 + PAO1 groups ( n = 3). (b) RT–qPCR was performed to detect the mRNA levels of HBE in the control, PM2.5, PAO1, and PM2.5 + PAO1 groups of HBE cells ( n = 3). (c) Cell lysate smear plate colony count ( n = 3). (d) RT–qPCR was performed to detect the mRNA levels of A549 in the control, PM2.5, PAO1, and PM2.5 + PAO1 groups of A549 cells ( n = 3). (a, b, d) ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, ∗∗∗ P < 0.001 vs. control, &&& P < 0.001 PAO1 vs. PAO1 + PM2.5 (one-way ANOVA). (c) ∗∗∗ P < 0.001 vs. PAO1, &&& P < 0.001 PAO1 + PM2.5 vs. HBD1 + PAO1 + PM2.5 (one-way ANOVA).
Techniques Used: Expressing, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay, Control, Quantitative RT-PCR
Figure Legend Snippet: Effect of PM2.5 on bacterial infestation. (a) The effect of PM2.5 on the bacterial invasiveness of PAO1-infested HBE was examined by the colony method. Different concentrations (0, 50, 100, 200 μ g/mL) of PM2.5 stimulated HBE cells for 24 hr, and then the configured PAO1 bacterial solution was added to the exposure model at different infection complexes (MOI = 1, 10, 20) ( n = 3). (b) The number of intracellular viable bacteria after PAO1 infection with HBE stimulated by different concentrations of PM2.5 (0/25/50/100 μ g/mL) ( n = 3). (c) The mice were modeled with gross lung and HE staining performance (c1–c4) in the order of control, PM2.5, PAO1, and PAO1 + PM2.5 groups ( n = 6). (d) For HE staining microscopic magnification × 40x observation (d1–d4) in order of control, PM2.5, PAO1, and PAO1 + PM2.5 groups ( n = 6). ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, ∗∗∗ P < 0.001 vs. control; &&& P < 0.001 PAO1 + PM2.5 vs. PAO1; ### P < 0.001 PAO1 + PM2.5 vs. HBD1 (one-way ANOVA). (e) H&E staining of mouse lung tissue for lung injury scoring ( n = 6).
Techniques Used: Infection, Bacteria, Staining, Control
Figure Legend Snippet: Mouse model and HBD1 expression. (a) IHC microscopic observation of mouse lung tissue HBD1, (a1–a4) in the order of control, PM2.5 group, PAO1 group, and PAO1 + PM2.5 group (scale bars = 100 µ m, n = 6). (b) IHC scoring of lung tissue in mice ( n = 6). (c) ELISA for secreted HBD1 in the supernatant of alveolar lavage fluid ( n = 6). (d) Detection of DEFB1 mRNA expression in lung tissue homogenates by RT–qPCR ( n = 6). (e) Flowchart of the animal model. (f) Survival curves for each group of mice. (g) Colony count of mouse lung grinding homogenate dilution coated plates ( n = 6). (b–d) ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, ∗∗∗ P < 0.001 vs. control, && P <0.01, &&& P < 0.001 PAO1 vs. PAO1 + PM2.5 (one-way ANOVA). (g) ∗∗∗ P < 0.001 PAO1 vs. PAO1 + PM2.5, &&& P < 0.001 PM2.5 + PAO1 vs. HBD1 + PM2.5 + PAO1 (one-way ANOVA).
Techniques Used: Expressing, Control, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay, Quantitative RT-PCR, Animal Model
Figure Legend Snippet: P -value after log-rank statistics for survival data for each group of mice ( n = 10, log-rank test).
Techniques Used: Mouse Assay
Figure Legend Snippet: Mouse model and HBD1 expression under inhibitor action. (a) Flowchart of the animal model. (b) Survival curves in each group under the effect of inhibitors. (c) Detection of DEFB1 mRNA expression in lung tissue homogenates by RT–qPCR ( n = 6). (d) ELISA for secreted HBD1 in the supernatant of alveolar lavage fluid ( n = 6). (e) IHC scoring of lung tissue in mice ( n = 6). ∗ P < 0.05, ∗∗ P < 0.01, ∗∗∗ P < 0.001 vs. PM2.5 + PAO1 ( t test).
Techniques Used: Expressing, Animal Model, Quantitative RT-PCR, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay
