Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 24, Number 2—February 2018
Research

Yersinia pestis Survival and Replication in Potential Ameba Reservoir

David W. MarkmanComments to Author , Michael F. Antolin, Richard A. Bowen, William H. Wheat, Michael Woods, Mercedes Gonzalez-Juarrero, and Mary Jackson
Author affiliations: Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado, USA (D.W. Markman, M.F. Antolin, R.A. Bowen, W.H. Wheat, M. Gonzalez-Juarrero, M. Jackson); Burrell College of Osteopathic Medicine, Las Cruces, New Mexico, USA (M. Woods)

Main Article

Figure 5

Intraameba Yersinia pestis abundance in Dictyostelium discoideum across 2 postinfection antibiotic drug exposure periods, 1-hour and 4-hour. In D. discoideum, the abundance of viable intracellular Y. pestis was significantly greater at each successive time point (24 and 48 hours) after the 1-hour antibiotic drug treatment (p = 0.01 and p = 0.002, respectively). After the 4-hour antibiotic drug treatment in D. discoideum, the abundance of viable intracellular Y. pestis at 24 and 48 hours was sign

Figure 5. Intraameba Yersinia pestis abundance in Dictyostelium discoideum across 2 postinfection antibiotic drug exposure periods, 1 hour and 4 hour. In D. discoideum, the abundance of viable intracellular Y. pestis was significantly greater at each successive time point (24 and 48 hours) after the 1-hour antibiotic drug treatment (p = 0.01 and p = 0.002, respectively). After the 4-hour antibiotic drug treatment in D. discoideum, the abundance of viable intracellular Y. pestis at 24 and 48 hours was significantly greater than at 4 hours (p = 0.008 and p = 0.001, respectively). The abundance of viable Y. pestis within D. discoideum at 48 hours postinfection was not significantly different between the 1-hour and 4-hour antibiotic drug treatments (p = 0.1624). Viable intracellular Y. pestis abundance was significantly greater in D. discoideum compared with all other species at 48 hours postinfection (p<0.001).

Download

Main Article

Page created: January 17, 2018
Page updated: January 17, 2018
Page reviewed: January 17, 2018
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
file_external