| Literature DB >> 31415664 |
.
Abstract
[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1007870.].Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31415664 PMCID: PMC6695090 DOI: 10.1371/journal.ppat.1008018
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS Pathog ISSN: 1553-7366 Impact factor: 6.823
Fig 2Antisera maps for IgG and IgM.
Maps were constructed from data on a, IgG at the acute timepoint; b, IgM at the acute timepoint; c, IgG at timepoint C2 (the consensus antisera map); d, IgM at timepoint C2. In c, solid and dashed lines point to positions in the map for IgG at the acute (as in a) and C1 timepoints, respectively. In d, solid lines point to positions in the consensus antisera map shown by the points in c. Symbol size is proportional to the antisera’s average log10 OD value at the timepoint indicated. R2 values represent goodness-of-fit to the consensus map with subscripts indicating the timepoint of the map being compared and asterisks indicating significance (***, P < 0.001; **, P < 0.01).