Review



ef 63  (ATCC)


Bioz Verified Symbol ATCC is a verified supplier
Bioz Manufacturer Symbol ATCC manufactures this product  
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
    • 99
      Buy from Supplier

    Structured Review

    ATCC ef 63
    Experimental workflow for iTRAQ labeling and analysis: iTRAQ 8-plex labeling was performed for two sets of biological replicates of the strains Ef 63, Ef 64, ATCC 51299, and ATCC 29212. Each strain was labeled as follows for the two biological replicates: <t>Ef</t> <t>63</t> (113, 117), Ef 64 (114, 118), ATCC 51299 (115, 119), and ATCC 29212 (116, 121). The labeled fractions were combined and subjected to strong cation exchange chromatography and desalting, followed by separation using liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), and bioinformatics data analysis.
    Ef 63, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 99/100, based on 11234 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/ef 63/product/ATCC
    Average 99 stars, based on 11234 article reviews
    ef 63 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-06
    99/100 stars

    Images

    1) Product Images from "Quantitative Proteomics of Strong and Weak Biofilm Formers of Enterococcus faecalis Reveals Novel Regulators of Biofilm Formation * "

    Article Title: Quantitative Proteomics of Strong and Weak Biofilm Formers of Enterococcus faecalis Reveals Novel Regulators of Biofilm Formation *

    Journal: Molecular & Cellular Proteomics : MCP

    doi: 10.1074/mcp.RA117.000461

    Experimental workflow for iTRAQ labeling and analysis: iTRAQ 8-plex labeling was performed for two sets of biological replicates of the strains Ef 63, Ef 64, ATCC 51299, and ATCC 29212. Each strain was labeled as follows for the two biological replicates: Ef 63 (113, 117), Ef 64 (114, 118), ATCC 51299 (115, 119), and ATCC 29212 (116, 121). The labeled fractions were combined and subjected to strong cation exchange chromatography and desalting, followed by separation using liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), and bioinformatics data analysis.
    Figure Legend Snippet: Experimental workflow for iTRAQ labeling and analysis: iTRAQ 8-plex labeling was performed for two sets of biological replicates of the strains Ef 63, Ef 64, ATCC 51299, and ATCC 29212. Each strain was labeled as follows for the two biological replicates: Ef 63 (113, 117), Ef 64 (114, 118), ATCC 51299 (115, 119), and ATCC 29212 (116, 121). The labeled fractions were combined and subjected to strong cation exchange chromatography and desalting, followed by separation using liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), and bioinformatics data analysis.

    Techniques Used: Labeling, Chromatography, Liquid Chromatography, Mass Spectrometry, Liquid Chromatography with Mass Spectroscopy

    Determination of experimental variation for the identified proteins: (A) experimental variation of Ef 63 compared with ATCC 29212; (B) experimental variation of Ef 64 compared with ATCC 29212; (C) experimental variation of Ef 63 compared with ATCC 51299; and (D) experimental variation of Ef 64 compared with ATCC 51299. The horizontal axis represents % variation of iTRAQ ratios. The primary vertical axis represents the corresponding number of proteins (bars) having different % variation. The secondary vertical axis represents the cumulative % of the counted proteins. Variation against 88% coverage of population was considered as the cutoff value.
    Figure Legend Snippet: Determination of experimental variation for the identified proteins: (A) experimental variation of Ef 63 compared with ATCC 29212; (B) experimental variation of Ef 64 compared with ATCC 29212; (C) experimental variation of Ef 63 compared with ATCC 51299; and (D) experimental variation of Ef 64 compared with ATCC 51299. The horizontal axis represents % variation of iTRAQ ratios. The primary vertical axis represents the corresponding number of proteins (bars) having different % variation. The secondary vertical axis represents the cumulative % of the counted proteins. Variation against 88% coverage of population was considered as the cutoff value.

    Techniques Used:

    Volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins reveal significance patterns: (A) volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins of Ef 63 compared with ATCC 29212; (B) volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins of Ef 64 compared with ATCC 29212; (C) volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins of Ef 63 compared with ATCC 51299; and (D) volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins of Ef 64 compared with ATCC 51299. Threshold cutoffs determined for log2 fold change ratios are represented by green lines. p value cutoff of 0.05 is represented by a yellow line. Gray dots represent proteins that do not show significant differences in expression, yellow dots represent proteins that show significant differences in expression but within the cutoff log2 fold change ratios, and red dots represent proteins that show significant differences in expression outside the cut-off log2 fold change ratios.
    Figure Legend Snippet: Volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins reveal significance patterns: (A) volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins of Ef 63 compared with ATCC 29212; (B) volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins of Ef 64 compared with ATCC 29212; (C) volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins of Ef 63 compared with ATCC 51299; and (D) volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins of Ef 64 compared with ATCC 51299. Threshold cutoffs determined for log2 fold change ratios are represented by green lines. p value cutoff of 0.05 is represented by a yellow line. Gray dots represent proteins that do not show significant differences in expression, yellow dots represent proteins that show significant differences in expression but within the cutoff log2 fold change ratios, and red dots represent proteins that show significant differences in expression outside the cut-off log2 fold change ratios.

    Techniques Used: Expressing

    Functional classification of the significantly up-regulated proteins of Ef 63 in comparison with both ATCC 29212 and 51299 strains meeting both p value cutoff and log 2 fold-change cutoff criteria
    Figure Legend Snippet: Functional classification of the significantly up-regulated proteins of Ef 63 in comparison with both ATCC 29212 and 51299 strains meeting both p value cutoff and log 2 fold-change cutoff criteria

    Techniques Used: Functional Assay

    Functional classification of the significantly down-regulated proteins of Ef 63 in comparison with both ATCC 29212 and 51299 strains meeting both p value cutoff and log 2 fold-change cutoff criteria
    Figure Legend Snippet: Functional classification of the significantly down-regulated proteins of Ef 63 in comparison with both ATCC 29212 and 51299 strains meeting both p value cutoff and log 2 fold-change cutoff criteria

    Techniques Used: Functional Assay, Binding Assay, Plasmid Preparation

    Gene ontology analysis of differentially regulated proteins reveals significantly affected pathways in Ef 63 and Ef 64: (A) biological processes, molecular functions, and cellular components that are significantly up-regulated in Ef 64 in comparison with ATCC 29212 and 51299 strains and (B) biological processes, molecular functions, and cellular components that are significantly down-regulated in Ef 63 in comparison with ATCC 29212 and 51299 strains.
    Figure Legend Snippet: Gene ontology analysis of differentially regulated proteins reveals significantly affected pathways in Ef 63 and Ef 64: (A) biological processes, molecular functions, and cellular components that are significantly up-regulated in Ef 64 in comparison with ATCC 29212 and 51299 strains and (B) biological processes, molecular functions, and cellular components that are significantly down-regulated in Ef 63 in comparison with ATCC 29212 and 51299 strains.

    Techniques Used:



    Similar Products

    ef 63  (ATCC)
    99
    ATCC ef 63
    Experimental workflow for iTRAQ labeling and analysis: iTRAQ 8-plex labeling was performed for two sets of biological replicates of the strains Ef 63, Ef 64, ATCC 51299, and ATCC 29212. Each strain was labeled as follows for the two biological replicates: <t>Ef</t> <t>63</t> (113, 117), Ef 64 (114, 118), ATCC 51299 (115, 119), and ATCC 29212 (116, 121). The labeled fractions were combined and subjected to strong cation exchange chromatography and desalting, followed by separation using liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), and bioinformatics data analysis.
    Ef 63, supplied by ATCC, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 99/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/ef 63/product/ATCC
    Average 99 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    ef 63 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-06
    99/100 stars
    		  Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results


    Experimental workflow for iTRAQ labeling and analysis: iTRAQ 8-plex labeling was performed for two sets of biological replicates of the strains Ef 63, Ef 64, ATCC 51299, and ATCC 29212. Each strain was labeled as follows for the two biological replicates: Ef 63 (113, 117), Ef 64 (114, 118), ATCC 51299 (115, 119), and ATCC 29212 (116, 121). The labeled fractions were combined and subjected to strong cation exchange chromatography and desalting, followed by separation using liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), and bioinformatics data analysis.

    Journal: Molecular & Cellular Proteomics : MCP

    Article Title: Quantitative Proteomics of Strong and Weak Biofilm Formers of Enterococcus faecalis Reveals Novel Regulators of Biofilm Formation *

    doi: 10.1074/mcp.RA117.000461

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Experimental workflow for iTRAQ labeling and analysis: iTRAQ 8-plex labeling was performed for two sets of biological replicates of the strains Ef 63, Ef 64, ATCC 51299, and ATCC 29212. Each strain was labeled as follows for the two biological replicates: Ef 63 (113, 117), Ef 64 (114, 118), ATCC 51299 (115, 119), and ATCC 29212 (116, 121). The labeled fractions were combined and subjected to strong cation exchange chromatography and desalting, followed by separation using liquid chromatography mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), and bioinformatics data analysis.

    Article Snippet: Based on these population statistics, the following cutoff fold change values were obtained for Ef 63 versus ATCC 51299 set: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, Ef 64 versus ATCC 51299: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, Ef 63 versus ATCC 29212: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, and Ef 64 versus ATCC 29212: >1.75-fold and <0.57 (1/1.75)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 75% variation ( ).

    Techniques: Labeling, Chromatography, Liquid Chromatography, Mass Spectrometry, Liquid Chromatography with Mass Spectroscopy

    Determination of experimental variation for the identified proteins: (A) experimental variation of Ef 63 compared with ATCC 29212; (B) experimental variation of Ef 64 compared with ATCC 29212; (C) experimental variation of Ef 63 compared with ATCC 51299; and (D) experimental variation of Ef 64 compared with ATCC 51299. The horizontal axis represents % variation of iTRAQ ratios. The primary vertical axis represents the corresponding number of proteins (bars) having different % variation. The secondary vertical axis represents the cumulative % of the counted proteins. Variation against 88% coverage of population was considered as the cutoff value.

    Journal: Molecular & Cellular Proteomics : MCP

    Article Title: Quantitative Proteomics of Strong and Weak Biofilm Formers of Enterococcus faecalis Reveals Novel Regulators of Biofilm Formation *

    doi: 10.1074/mcp.RA117.000461

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Determination of experimental variation for the identified proteins: (A) experimental variation of Ef 63 compared with ATCC 29212; (B) experimental variation of Ef 64 compared with ATCC 29212; (C) experimental variation of Ef 63 compared with ATCC 51299; and (D) experimental variation of Ef 64 compared with ATCC 51299. The horizontal axis represents % variation of iTRAQ ratios. The primary vertical axis represents the corresponding number of proteins (bars) having different % variation. The secondary vertical axis represents the cumulative % of the counted proteins. Variation against 88% coverage of population was considered as the cutoff value.

    Article Snippet: Based on these population statistics, the following cutoff fold change values were obtained for Ef 63 versus ATCC 51299 set: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, Ef 64 versus ATCC 51299: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, Ef 63 versus ATCC 29212: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, and Ef 64 versus ATCC 29212: >1.75-fold and <0.57 (1/1.75)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 75% variation ( ).

    Techniques:

    Volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins reveal significance patterns: (A) volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins of Ef 63 compared with ATCC 29212; (B) volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins of Ef 64 compared with ATCC 29212; (C) volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins of Ef 63 compared with ATCC 51299; and (D) volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins of Ef 64 compared with ATCC 51299. Threshold cutoffs determined for log2 fold change ratios are represented by green lines. p value cutoff of 0.05 is represented by a yellow line. Gray dots represent proteins that do not show significant differences in expression, yellow dots represent proteins that show significant differences in expression but within the cutoff log2 fold change ratios, and red dots represent proteins that show significant differences in expression outside the cut-off log2 fold change ratios.

    Journal: Molecular & Cellular Proteomics : MCP

    Article Title: Quantitative Proteomics of Strong and Weak Biofilm Formers of Enterococcus faecalis Reveals Novel Regulators of Biofilm Formation *

    doi: 10.1074/mcp.RA117.000461

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins reveal significance patterns: (A) volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins of Ef 63 compared with ATCC 29212; (B) volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins of Ef 64 compared with ATCC 29212; (C) volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins of Ef 63 compared with ATCC 51299; and (D) volcano plots of differentially regulated proteins of Ef 64 compared with ATCC 51299. Threshold cutoffs determined for log2 fold change ratios are represented by green lines. p value cutoff of 0.05 is represented by a yellow line. Gray dots represent proteins that do not show significant differences in expression, yellow dots represent proteins that show significant differences in expression but within the cutoff log2 fold change ratios, and red dots represent proteins that show significant differences in expression outside the cut-off log2 fold change ratios.

    Article Snippet: Based on these population statistics, the following cutoff fold change values were obtained for Ef 63 versus ATCC 51299 set: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, Ef 64 versus ATCC 51299: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, Ef 63 versus ATCC 29212: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, and Ef 64 versus ATCC 29212: >1.75-fold and <0.57 (1/1.75)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 75% variation ( ).

    Techniques: Expressing

    Functional classification of the significantly up-regulated proteins of Ef 63 in comparison with both ATCC 29212 and 51299 strains meeting both p value cutoff and log 2 fold-change cutoff criteria

    Journal: Molecular & Cellular Proteomics : MCP

    Article Title: Quantitative Proteomics of Strong and Weak Biofilm Formers of Enterococcus faecalis Reveals Novel Regulators of Biofilm Formation *

    doi: 10.1074/mcp.RA117.000461

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Functional classification of the significantly up-regulated proteins of Ef 63 in comparison with both ATCC 29212 and 51299 strains meeting both p value cutoff and log 2 fold-change cutoff criteria

    Article Snippet: Based on these population statistics, the following cutoff fold change values were obtained for Ef 63 versus ATCC 51299 set: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, Ef 64 versus ATCC 51299: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, Ef 63 versus ATCC 29212: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, and Ef 64 versus ATCC 29212: >1.75-fold and <0.57 (1/1.75)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 75% variation ( ).

    Techniques: Functional Assay

    Functional classification of the significantly down-regulated proteins of Ef 63 in comparison with both ATCC 29212 and 51299 strains meeting both p value cutoff and log 2 fold-change cutoff criteria

    Journal: Molecular & Cellular Proteomics : MCP

    Article Title: Quantitative Proteomics of Strong and Weak Biofilm Formers of Enterococcus faecalis Reveals Novel Regulators of Biofilm Formation *

    doi: 10.1074/mcp.RA117.000461

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Functional classification of the significantly down-regulated proteins of Ef 63 in comparison with both ATCC 29212 and 51299 strains meeting both p value cutoff and log 2 fold-change cutoff criteria

    Article Snippet: Based on these population statistics, the following cutoff fold change values were obtained for Ef 63 versus ATCC 51299 set: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, Ef 64 versus ATCC 51299: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, Ef 63 versus ATCC 29212: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, and Ef 64 versus ATCC 29212: >1.75-fold and <0.57 (1/1.75)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 75% variation ( ).

    Techniques: Functional Assay, Binding Assay, Plasmid Preparation

    Gene ontology analysis of differentially regulated proteins reveals significantly affected pathways in Ef 63 and Ef 64: (A) biological processes, molecular functions, and cellular components that are significantly up-regulated in Ef 64 in comparison with ATCC 29212 and 51299 strains and (B) biological processes, molecular functions, and cellular components that are significantly down-regulated in Ef 63 in comparison with ATCC 29212 and 51299 strains.

    Journal: Molecular & Cellular Proteomics : MCP

    Article Title: Quantitative Proteomics of Strong and Weak Biofilm Formers of Enterococcus faecalis Reveals Novel Regulators of Biofilm Formation *

    doi: 10.1074/mcp.RA117.000461

    Figure Lengend Snippet: Gene ontology analysis of differentially regulated proteins reveals significantly affected pathways in Ef 63 and Ef 64: (A) biological processes, molecular functions, and cellular components that are significantly up-regulated in Ef 64 in comparison with ATCC 29212 and 51299 strains and (B) biological processes, molecular functions, and cellular components that are significantly down-regulated in Ef 63 in comparison with ATCC 29212 and 51299 strains.

    Article Snippet: Based on these population statistics, the following cutoff fold change values were obtained for Ef 63 versus ATCC 51299 set: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, Ef 64 versus ATCC 51299: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, Ef 63 versus ATCC 29212: >1.5-fold and <0.67 (1/1.5)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 50% variation, and Ef 64 versus ATCC 29212: >1.75-fold and <0.57 (1/1.75)-fold for up-regulated and down-regulated proteins corresponding to 75% variation ( ).

    Techniques: