Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Figure 1.

Comparison of unfiltered and filtered M. smegmatis.

Unfiltered M. smegmatis under 40x magnification (A) and plated onto agar (B); M. smegmatis filtered through 5-µm pore filter under 40 x magnification (C) and plated onto agar (D), scale bar applies to both A and C.

More »

Figure 1 Expand

Table 1.

Recovery of M. smegmatis after Vortexing and Filtration.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Figure 2.

Histogram of unfiltered, vortexed and filtered M. smegmatis.

Distributions of resorufin fluorescence signals from 384 wells of a 384-well plate contained unfiltered (A), vortexed (B) or filtered (C) M. smegmatis. After the treatment, the bacteria were distributed into the 384-well plates followed by the addition of resazurin, which was converted to resorufin by the living bacteria.

More »

Figure 2 Expand

Figure 3.

Agreement analysis of duplicate plates from unfiltered, vortexed and filtered bacteria.

Correlation of two duplicate assay plates tested against LOPAC compounds using unfiltered bacteria (A), vortexed bacteria (B) and filtered bacteria (C).

More »

Figure 3 Expand

Figure 4.

Micrograph of unfiltered and filtered M. tuberculosis.

Unfiltered M. tuberculosis under 40x magnification (A) and filtered through 5-µm pore filter under 40x magnification (B), scale bar applies to both A and B.

More »

Figure 4 Expand