p insr Search Results


ins(2,4,5)p  (POSTECH Inc)
90
POSTECH Inc ins(2,4,5)p
Ins(2,4,5)p, supplied by POSTECH Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/p+insr/ins+2+4+5+p/10__1042_slash_bj3350671-33-27-41
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
ins(2,4,5)p - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
gene exp hnf4a hs00230853 m1  (Thermo Fisher)
98
Thermo Fisher gene exp hnf4a hs00230853 m1
Gene Exp Hnf4a Hs00230853 M1, supplied by Thermo Fisher, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 98/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/p+insr/Gene+Exp%2E+HNF4A%2C+Hs00230853_m1/pmc11468483__ADHM___13___2303785___s002-23-4-5
Average 98 stars, based on 1 article reviews
gene exp hnf4a hs00230853 m1 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
98/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
pi 3 4 5 p 3 1 2 dioleoyl sn glycero 3 phospho 1 myo inositol 3 4 5 trisphosphate  (Avanti Polar)
90
Avanti Polar pi 3 4 5 p 3 1 2 dioleoyl sn glycero 3 phospho 1 myo inositol 3 4 5 trisphosphate
Pi 3 4 5 P 3 1 2 Dioleoyl Sn Glycero 3 Phospho 1 Myo Inositol 3 4 5 Trisphosphate, supplied by Avanti Polar, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/p+insr/18%3A1+PI(3%2C4%2C5)P3/pmc06381110-255-64-94
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
pi 3 4 5 p 3 1 2 dioleoyl sn glycero 3 phospho 1 myo inositol 3 4 5 trisphosphate - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
fmoc r 3 amino 3  (Chem Impex International)
95
Chem Impex International fmoc r 3 amino 3
Fmoc R 3 Amino 3, supplied by Chem Impex International, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 95/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/p+insr/Propionic+acid/pm35226505__ol2c00046_si_001-39-15-25
Average 95 stars, based on 1 article reviews
fmoc r 3 amino 3 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
95/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
monoclonal antibodies against phospho insulin receptor β  (Santa Cruz Biotechnology)
93
Santa Cruz Biotechnology monoclonal antibodies against phospho insulin receptor β
Effects of Pas2r12 or Pas2r12–cargo protein complex-mediated stimulation on <t>INSR/IGF1R</t> and ERK1/2. HEK293 cells were pretreated with dimethyl sulfoxide (linsitinib [−]) or with linsitinib (linsitinib [+]) and subsequently stimulated with Pas2r12, Pas2r12–EGFP, Pas2r12–IgG, or insulin for 2 min ( A – C ) or 10 min ( D – F ). Panels A and D show representative Western blot images. Panels B and E display the phosphorylation levels of INSR/IGF1R (pINSR/pIGF1R); panels C and F show the phosphorylation levels of ERK1/2 (pERK1/2); all values were normalized to GAPDH. Phosphorylation levels were analyzed and compared with the solvent control (DMEM only, linsitinib [−]) using Student’s t -test. For each treatment condition, linsitinib (+) was compared with the corresponding linsitinib (−) condition. Statistically significant differences compared with the control are indicated on the bar graphs; significant differences between linsitinib (+) and linsitinib (−) treatments are marked by horizontal lines. Statistical comparisons were performed against control cells using Student’s t -test. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM). * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01. N = 4.
Monoclonal Antibodies Against Phospho Insulin Receptor β, supplied by Santa Cruz Biotechnology, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/p+insr/p-insulin+R%CE%B2+Antibody/pmc12736253-192-5-15
Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
monoclonal antibodies against phospho insulin receptor β - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
93/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
d - myo -inositol-1,2,3,5,6-pentakisphosphate [ins(1,2,3,5,6)p 5  (AG Scientific)
90
AG Scientific d - myo -inositol-1,2,3,5,6-pentakisphosphate [ins(1,2,3,5,6)p 5
Effects of Pas2r12 or Pas2r12–cargo protein complex-mediated stimulation on <t>INSR/IGF1R</t> and ERK1/2. HEK293 cells were pretreated with dimethyl sulfoxide (linsitinib [−]) or with linsitinib (linsitinib [+]) and subsequently stimulated with Pas2r12, Pas2r12–EGFP, Pas2r12–IgG, or insulin for 2 min ( A – C ) or 10 min ( D – F ). Panels A and D show representative Western blot images. Panels B and E display the phosphorylation levels of INSR/IGF1R (pINSR/pIGF1R); panels C and F show the phosphorylation levels of ERK1/2 (pERK1/2); all values were normalized to GAPDH. Phosphorylation levels were analyzed and compared with the solvent control (DMEM only, linsitinib [−]) using Student’s t -test. For each treatment condition, linsitinib (+) was compared with the corresponding linsitinib (−) condition. Statistically significant differences compared with the control are indicated on the bar graphs; significant differences between linsitinib (+) and linsitinib (−) treatments are marked by horizontal lines. Statistical comparisons were performed against control cells using Student’s t -test. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM). * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01. N = 4.
D Myo Inositol 1,2,3,5,6 Pentakisphosphate [Ins(1,2,3,5,6)p 5, supplied by AG Scientific, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/p+insr/ins+1+4+5+p3/pmc01635404-107-89-99
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
d - myo -inositol-1,2,3,5,6-pentakisphosphate [ins(1,2,3,5,6)p 5 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
anti minpp1  (Boster Bio)
93
Boster Bio anti minpp1
Effects of Pas2r12 or Pas2r12–cargo protein complex-mediated stimulation on <t>INSR/IGF1R</t> and ERK1/2. HEK293 cells were pretreated with dimethyl sulfoxide (linsitinib [−]) or with linsitinib (linsitinib [+]) and subsequently stimulated with Pas2r12, Pas2r12–EGFP, Pas2r12–IgG, or insulin for 2 min ( A – C ) or 10 min ( D – F ). Panels A and D show representative Western blot images. Panels B and E display the phosphorylation levels of INSR/IGF1R (pINSR/pIGF1R); panels C and F show the phosphorylation levels of ERK1/2 (pERK1/2); all values were normalized to GAPDH. Phosphorylation levels were analyzed and compared with the solvent control (DMEM only, linsitinib [−]) using Student’s t -test. For each treatment condition, linsitinib (+) was compared with the corresponding linsitinib (−) condition. Statistically significant differences compared with the control are indicated on the bar graphs; significant differences between linsitinib (+) and linsitinib (−) treatments are marked by horizontal lines. Statistical comparisons were performed against control cells using Student’s t -test. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM). * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01. N = 4.
Anti Minpp1, supplied by Boster Bio, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/p+insr/Anti-MINPP1%2FMipp+Antibody/pmc12648906-52-39-42
Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
anti minpp1 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
93/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
ins(1,5,6)p  (POSTECH Inc)
90
POSTECH Inc ins(1,5,6)p
Effects of Pas2r12 or Pas2r12–cargo protein complex-mediated stimulation on <t>INSR/IGF1R</t> and ERK1/2. HEK293 cells were pretreated with dimethyl sulfoxide (linsitinib [−]) or with linsitinib (linsitinib [+]) and subsequently stimulated with Pas2r12, Pas2r12–EGFP, Pas2r12–IgG, or insulin for 2 min ( A – C ) or 10 min ( D – F ). Panels A and D show representative Western blot images. Panels B and E display the phosphorylation levels of INSR/IGF1R (pINSR/pIGF1R); panels C and F show the phosphorylation levels of ERK1/2 (pERK1/2); all values were normalized to GAPDH. Phosphorylation levels were analyzed and compared with the solvent control (DMEM only, linsitinib [−]) using Student’s t -test. For each treatment condition, linsitinib (+) was compared with the corresponding linsitinib (−) condition. Statistically significant differences compared with the control are indicated on the bar graphs; significant differences between linsitinib (+) and linsitinib (−) treatments are marked by horizontal lines. Statistical comparisons were performed against control cells using Student’s t -test. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM). * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01. N = 4.
Ins(1,5,6)p, supplied by POSTECH Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/p+insr/ins+1+4+5+p/10__1042_slash_bj3350671-33-24-41
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
ins(1,5,6)p - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
cdc lts  (BioGents Inc)
90
BioGents Inc cdc lts
Effect of trapping methodology on Aedes albopictus detection
Cdc Lts, supplied by BioGents Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/p+insr/cdc+lts/pmc07008348-152-27-0
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
cdc lts - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
ins 1 4 5 p  (Sirius Fine Chemicals)
94
Sirius Fine Chemicals ins 1 4 5 p
Effect of trapping methodology on Aedes albopictus detection
Ins 1 4 5 P, supplied by Sirius Fine Chemicals, 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/product/p+insr/caged+Ins+Phosphate/pmc04785603-27-15-23
Average 94 stars, based on 1 article reviews
ins 1 4 5 p - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
94/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
phospho insulin receptor igf 1 receptor  (Cell Signaling Technology Inc)
93
Cell Signaling Technology Inc phospho insulin receptor igf 1 receptor
Effect of trapping methodology on Aedes albopictus detection
Phospho Insulin Receptor Igf 1 Receptor, supplied by Cell Signaling Technology Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/p+insr/Phospho-CDCP1+(Tyr806)+Antibody/10__1074_slash_jbc__m116__735738-148-8-27
Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
phospho insulin receptor igf 1 receptor - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
93/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier
phosphorylated insulin receptor β subunit  (Cell Signaling Technology Inc)
96
Cell Signaling Technology Inc phosphorylated insulin receptor β subunit
Effect of trapping methodology on Aedes albopictus detection
Phosphorylated Insulin Receptor β Subunit, supplied by Cell Signaling Technology Inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 96/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/p+insr/Phospho-IGF-I+Receptor+beta+(Tyr1135%2F1136)%2FInsulin+Receptor+beta+(Tyr1150%2F1151)+Rabbit+mAb/pmc03510849-62-39-48
Average 96 stars, based on 1 article reviews
phosphorylated insulin receptor β subunit - by Bioz Stars, 2026-10
96/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

Image Search Results


Effects of Pas2r12 or Pas2r12–cargo protein complex-mediated stimulation on INSR/IGF1R and ERK1/2. HEK293 cells were pretreated with dimethyl sulfoxide (linsitinib [−]) or with linsitinib (linsitinib [+]) and subsequently stimulated with Pas2r12, Pas2r12–EGFP, Pas2r12–IgG, or insulin for 2 min ( A – C ) or 10 min ( D – F ). Panels A and D show representative Western blot images. Panels B and E display the phosphorylation levels of INSR/IGF1R (pINSR/pIGF1R); panels C and F show the phosphorylation levels of ERK1/2 (pERK1/2); all values were normalized to GAPDH. Phosphorylation levels were analyzed and compared with the solvent control (DMEM only, linsitinib [−]) using Student’s t -test. For each treatment condition, linsitinib (+) was compared with the corresponding linsitinib (−) condition. Statistically significant differences compared with the control are indicated on the bar graphs; significant differences between linsitinib (+) and linsitinib (−) treatments are marked by horizontal lines. Statistical comparisons were performed against control cells using Student’s t -test. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM). * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01. N = 4.

Journal: Pharmaceuticals

Article Title: Role of the Insulin Receptor in Mediating Cytosolic Delivery of Proteins by a Modified Cell-Penetrating Peptide

doi: 10.3390/ph18121885

Figure Lengend Snippet: Effects of Pas2r12 or Pas2r12–cargo protein complex-mediated stimulation on INSR/IGF1R and ERK1/2. HEK293 cells were pretreated with dimethyl sulfoxide (linsitinib [−]) or with linsitinib (linsitinib [+]) and subsequently stimulated with Pas2r12, Pas2r12–EGFP, Pas2r12–IgG, or insulin for 2 min ( A – C ) or 10 min ( D – F ). Panels A and D show representative Western blot images. Panels B and E display the phosphorylation levels of INSR/IGF1R (pINSR/pIGF1R); panels C and F show the phosphorylation levels of ERK1/2 (pERK1/2); all values were normalized to GAPDH. Phosphorylation levels were analyzed and compared with the solvent control (DMEM only, linsitinib [−]) using Student’s t -test. For each treatment condition, linsitinib (+) was compared with the corresponding linsitinib (−) condition. Statistically significant differences compared with the control are indicated on the bar graphs; significant differences between linsitinib (+) and linsitinib (−) treatments are marked by horizontal lines. Statistical comparisons were performed against control cells using Student’s t -test. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM). * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01. N = 4.

Article Snippet: Membranes were incubated with primary monoclonal antibodies against phospho-insulin receptor β (p-IRβ; clone 10C3, sc-81500; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Dallas, TX, USA), INSR (MAA895Hu21; Cloud-Clone Corp., Houston, TX, USA), phospho-ERK1/2 (sc-7383; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), ERK1/2 (sc-514302; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), and IGF-1 receptor (MAB659Hu22; Cloud-Clone Corp).

Techniques: Western Blot, Phospho-proteomics, Solvent, Control

Effect of IGF1R and INSR knockdown on the Pas2r12-mediated cytosolic delivery of EGFP. Western blot analyses ( A – C ) and confocal laser scanning microscopy images ( D , E ). Graphs B and C show IGF1R and INSR expression levels, respectively, normalized to GAPDH. Cells analyzed with confocal laser scanning microscopy in panel A were analyzed by Western blot ( A – C ). ( D ) Pas2r12-mediated cytosolic delivery of EGFP in knockdown cells, with EGFP fluorescence shown in green, and ( E ) percentage of cells exhibiting cytosolic EGFP delivery. Scale bars represent 20 μm. Statistical comparisons were performed against siNC cells using Student’s t -test. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM). * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001. N = 4.

Journal: Pharmaceuticals

Article Title: Role of the Insulin Receptor in Mediating Cytosolic Delivery of Proteins by a Modified Cell-Penetrating Peptide

doi: 10.3390/ph18121885

Figure Lengend Snippet: Effect of IGF1R and INSR knockdown on the Pas2r12-mediated cytosolic delivery of EGFP. Western blot analyses ( A – C ) and confocal laser scanning microscopy images ( D , E ). Graphs B and C show IGF1R and INSR expression levels, respectively, normalized to GAPDH. Cells analyzed with confocal laser scanning microscopy in panel A were analyzed by Western blot ( A – C ). ( D ) Pas2r12-mediated cytosolic delivery of EGFP in knockdown cells, with EGFP fluorescence shown in green, and ( E ) percentage of cells exhibiting cytosolic EGFP delivery. Scale bars represent 20 μm. Statistical comparisons were performed against siNC cells using Student’s t -test. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM). * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001. N = 4.

Article Snippet: Membranes were incubated with primary monoclonal antibodies against phospho-insulin receptor β (p-IRβ; clone 10C3, sc-81500; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Dallas, TX, USA), INSR (MAA895Hu21; Cloud-Clone Corp., Houston, TX, USA), phospho-ERK1/2 (sc-7383; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), ERK1/2 (sc-514302; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), and IGF-1 receptor (MAB659Hu22; Cloud-Clone Corp).

Techniques: Knockdown, Western Blot, Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy, Expressing, Fluorescence

Effects of Pas2r12 or Pas2r12–cargo protein complex stimulation on INSR/IGF1R in IGF1R-overexpressing cells. ( A ) HEKI#66 cells pretreated with DMSO (linsitinib [−]) or linsitinib (linsitinib [+]) were stimulated with Pas2r12, Pas2r12–EGFP, or insulin for 2 min. Level of phosphorylated INSR/IGF1R (pINSR/pIGF1R) was assessed by Western blot. ( B ) Relative levels of pINSR/pIGF1R, normalized to GAPDH, corresponding to the data in panel A. Phosphorylation levels were analyzed using Student’s t -test. Each treatment condition was compared with the solvent-treated HEKI#66 control (linsitinib [−]), and, for each treatment, phosphorylation levels in the linsitinib (−) and linsitinib (+) conditions were also compared. Statistically significant differences compared with the solvent-treated control are indicated on the bar graphs, and significant differences between linsitinib (+) and linsitinib (−) treatments are marked by horizontal lines. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM). * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001. N = 3.

Journal: Pharmaceuticals

Article Title: Role of the Insulin Receptor in Mediating Cytosolic Delivery of Proteins by a Modified Cell-Penetrating Peptide

doi: 10.3390/ph18121885

Figure Lengend Snippet: Effects of Pas2r12 or Pas2r12–cargo protein complex stimulation on INSR/IGF1R in IGF1R-overexpressing cells. ( A ) HEKI#66 cells pretreated with DMSO (linsitinib [−]) or linsitinib (linsitinib [+]) were stimulated with Pas2r12, Pas2r12–EGFP, or insulin for 2 min. Level of phosphorylated INSR/IGF1R (pINSR/pIGF1R) was assessed by Western blot. ( B ) Relative levels of pINSR/pIGF1R, normalized to GAPDH, corresponding to the data in panel A. Phosphorylation levels were analyzed using Student’s t -test. Each treatment condition was compared with the solvent-treated HEKI#66 control (linsitinib [−]), and, for each treatment, phosphorylation levels in the linsitinib (−) and linsitinib (+) conditions were also compared. Statistically significant differences compared with the solvent-treated control are indicated on the bar graphs, and significant differences between linsitinib (+) and linsitinib (−) treatments are marked by horizontal lines. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM). * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001. N = 3.

Article Snippet: Membranes were incubated with primary monoclonal antibodies against phospho-insulin receptor β (p-IRβ; clone 10C3, sc-81500; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Dallas, TX, USA), INSR (MAA895Hu21; Cloud-Clone Corp., Houston, TX, USA), phospho-ERK1/2 (sc-7383; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), ERK1/2 (sc-514302; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), and IGF-1 receptor (MAB659Hu22; Cloud-Clone Corp).

Techniques: Western Blot, Phospho-proteomics, Solvent, Control

Assessment of INSR overexpression. ( A ) Verification of INSR expression levels in INSR-overexpressing (IN) cells. ( B ) Relative levels of INSR expression normalized to GAPDH, based on the data in panel A. The value for INSR/GAPDH in parental HEK293 cells was set to 1.0 for comparison. Statistical comparisons were performed against HEK293 cells using Student’s t -test. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM). * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01. N = 3. ( C ) Subcellular localization of INSR in IN cells. Green indicates INSR, and blue indicates nuclei. Scale bars represent 20 μm.

Journal: Pharmaceuticals

Article Title: Role of the Insulin Receptor in Mediating Cytosolic Delivery of Proteins by a Modified Cell-Penetrating Peptide

doi: 10.3390/ph18121885

Figure Lengend Snippet: Assessment of INSR overexpression. ( A ) Verification of INSR expression levels in INSR-overexpressing (IN) cells. ( B ) Relative levels of INSR expression normalized to GAPDH, based on the data in panel A. The value for INSR/GAPDH in parental HEK293 cells was set to 1.0 for comparison. Statistical comparisons were performed against HEK293 cells using Student’s t -test. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM). * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01. N = 3. ( C ) Subcellular localization of INSR in IN cells. Green indicates INSR, and blue indicates nuclei. Scale bars represent 20 μm.

Article Snippet: Membranes were incubated with primary monoclonal antibodies against phospho-insulin receptor β (p-IRβ; clone 10C3, sc-81500; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Dallas, TX, USA), INSR (MAA895Hu21; Cloud-Clone Corp., Houston, TX, USA), phospho-ERK1/2 (sc-7383; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), ERK1/2 (sc-514302; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), and IGF-1 receptor (MAB659Hu22; Cloud-Clone Corp).

Techniques: Over Expression, Expressing, Comparison

Effects of Pas2r12 or Pas2r12–cargo protein complex stimulation on INSR/IGF1R in INSR-overexpressing cells. ( A ) IN#1 cells pretreated with DMSO (linsitinib [−]) or linsitinib (linsitinib [+]) were stimulated with Pas2r12, Pas2r12–EGFP, or insulin for 2 min. Phosphorylation of INSR/IGF1R (pINSR/pIGF1R) was assessed by Western blot. ( B ) Relative levels of pINSR/pIGF1R were normalized to GAPDH, corresponding to the data in panel A. Phosphorylation levels were analyzed using Student’s t -test. Each treatment condition was compared with the solvent-treated IN#1 control (linsitinib [−]), and for each treatment, phosphorylation levels in the linsitinib (−) and linsitinib (+) conditions were also compared. Statistically significant differences compared with the solvent-treated control are indicated on the bar graphs, and significant differences between linsitinib (+) and linsitinib (−) treatments are marked by horizontal lines. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM). * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, and *** p < 0.001. N = 3.

Journal: Pharmaceuticals

Article Title: Role of the Insulin Receptor in Mediating Cytosolic Delivery of Proteins by a Modified Cell-Penetrating Peptide

doi: 10.3390/ph18121885

Figure Lengend Snippet: Effects of Pas2r12 or Pas2r12–cargo protein complex stimulation on INSR/IGF1R in INSR-overexpressing cells. ( A ) IN#1 cells pretreated with DMSO (linsitinib [−]) or linsitinib (linsitinib [+]) were stimulated with Pas2r12, Pas2r12–EGFP, or insulin for 2 min. Phosphorylation of INSR/IGF1R (pINSR/pIGF1R) was assessed by Western blot. ( B ) Relative levels of pINSR/pIGF1R were normalized to GAPDH, corresponding to the data in panel A. Phosphorylation levels were analyzed using Student’s t -test. Each treatment condition was compared with the solvent-treated IN#1 control (linsitinib [−]), and for each treatment, phosphorylation levels in the linsitinib (−) and linsitinib (+) conditions were also compared. Statistically significant differences compared with the solvent-treated control are indicated on the bar graphs, and significant differences between linsitinib (+) and linsitinib (−) treatments are marked by horizontal lines. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM). * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, and *** p < 0.001. N = 3.

Article Snippet: Membranes were incubated with primary monoclonal antibodies against phospho-insulin receptor β (p-IRβ; clone 10C3, sc-81500; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Dallas, TX, USA), INSR (MAA895Hu21; Cloud-Clone Corp., Houston, TX, USA), phospho-ERK1/2 (sc-7383; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), ERK1/2 (sc-514302; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), and IGF-1 receptor (MAB659Hu22; Cloud-Clone Corp).

Techniques: Phospho-proteomics, Western Blot, Solvent, Control

Effect of INSR overexpression on the Pas2r12-mediated cytosolic delivery of EGFP. ( A ) Representative confocal images showing cellular uptake of Pas2r12–EGFP in INSR-overexpressing (IN) cells. Merged images show EGFP fluorescence (green), Hoechst 33342 nuclear staining (blue), and differential interference contrast. Scale bars represent 20 μm. ( B ) Relative levels of the cytosolic delivery efficiency of EGFP in IN cells compared with parental HEK293 cells (set to 100%). Statistical comparisons were performed against HEK293 cells using Student’s t -test. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM). * p < 0.05. N = 3.

Journal: Pharmaceuticals

Article Title: Role of the Insulin Receptor in Mediating Cytosolic Delivery of Proteins by a Modified Cell-Penetrating Peptide

doi: 10.3390/ph18121885

Figure Lengend Snippet: Effect of INSR overexpression on the Pas2r12-mediated cytosolic delivery of EGFP. ( A ) Representative confocal images showing cellular uptake of Pas2r12–EGFP in INSR-overexpressing (IN) cells. Merged images show EGFP fluorescence (green), Hoechst 33342 nuclear staining (blue), and differential interference contrast. Scale bars represent 20 μm. ( B ) Relative levels of the cytosolic delivery efficiency of EGFP in IN cells compared with parental HEK293 cells (set to 100%). Statistical comparisons were performed against HEK293 cells using Student’s t -test. Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM). * p < 0.05. N = 3.

Article Snippet: Membranes were incubated with primary monoclonal antibodies against phospho-insulin receptor β (p-IRβ; clone 10C3, sc-81500; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Dallas, TX, USA), INSR (MAA895Hu21; Cloud-Clone Corp., Houston, TX, USA), phospho-ERK1/2 (sc-7383; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), ERK1/2 (sc-514302; Santa Cruz Biotechnology), and IGF-1 receptor (MAB659Hu22; Cloud-Clone Corp).

Techniques: Over Expression, Fluorescence, Staining

Effect of trapping methodology on Aedes albopictus detection

Journal: The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene

Article Title: Environmental Determinants of Aedes albopictus Abundance at a Northern Limit of Its Range in the United States

doi: 10.4269/ajtmh.19-0244

Figure Lengend Snippet: Effect of trapping methodology on Aedes albopictus detection

Article Snippet: Biogents-Sentinel traps were 2.78 times more efficient than GTs (incidence rate ratio [IRR] 95% CI: 2.50, 3.13; P -value: < 0.001) and 1.49 times more efficient than CDC LTs (IRR 95% CI: 1.37, 1.67; P -value: < 0.001) (Model 1).

Techniques: