Figure 3.
Figure 3. Comparative kinetic studies of DC-derived osteoclast and monocyte-derived osteoclast formation. (A) Kinetic studies of monocytes or DCs cultured in the presence of M-CSF and RANKL. The number of mononucleated cells (bold lines and ▴, read on left y-axis) and the number of DC-derived MGCs and monocyte-derived MGCs (dashed lines and ▪, read on right y-axis) were counted. (B) Estimate of the average number of nuclei in DC-derived MGCs (▪) versus monocyte-derived MGCs (▦). (C) Percentage of nuclei included in DC-derived MGCs (▪) or monocyte-derived MGCs (▦) in comparison with the total number of nuclei in the culture. Results are means ± SD of 3 independent experiments.

Comparative kinetic studies of DC-derived osteoclast and monocyte-derived osteoclast formation. (A) Kinetic studies of monocytes or DCs cultured in the presence of M-CSF and RANKL. The number of mononucleated cells (bold lines and ▴, read on left y-axis) and the number of DC-derived MGCs and monocyte-derived MGCs (dashed lines and ▪, read on right y-axis) were counted. (B) Estimate of the average number of nuclei in DC-derived MGCs (▪) versus monocyte-derived MGCs (▦). (C) Percentage of nuclei included in DC-derived MGCs (▪) or monocyte-derived MGCs (▦) in comparison with the total number of nuclei in the culture. Results are means ± SD of 3 independent experiments.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal