Skip to main content
Figure 2 | BMC Biochemistry

Figure 2

From: The use of transformed IMR90 cell model to identify the potential extra-telomeric effects of hTERT in cell migration and DNA damage response

Figure 2

Migration capability analysis of IMR90 RSH and IMR90 hTERT cells. (A) Boyden assay comparing the migration capability of IMR90 control and IMR90 RSH cells after 10 hours. (B) Wound healing assay comparing the migration of IMR90 control and IMR90 RSH cells after 9 hours of incubation. Images at 0 hour and at 9 hours, representative of triplicate experiments for IMR90 control and IMR90 RSH cells, are shown. White arrows indicate individual cells that have migrated. (C) The ‘wound closure’ areas are visualized under an inverted microscope and bar graphs show the distance travelled by IMR90 control and IMR90 RSH cells in the wound healing assay. Results are indicated as the mean ± standard deviation (SD) (n = 2). *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p <0.001. (D) Western blot confirming the overexpression of hTERT in IMR90 primary human cells. (E) Wound healing assay comparing the migration of IMR90 control and IMR90 hTERT cells after 32 hours of incubation. Images at 0 hour and at 32 hours, representative of triplicate experiments for IMR90 control and IMR90 hTERT cells, are shown. White arrows indicate individual cells that have migrated. (F) Bar graphs showing the distance travelled by IMR90 control and IMR90 hTERT cells in the wound healing assay. Results are indicated as the mean ± standard deviation (SD) (n = 2). *p <0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p <0.001.

Back to article page