PBR raw data archive

Spreadsheet of raw tadpole assiciation time data and MHC-PBR amino acid stimulus differentials

Within-families experimental design; sample sizes by genotype and treatment.

<p>Within-families experimental design; sample sizes by genotype and treatment.</p

Among-families experimental design; sample sizes by genotype and treatment.

<p>Among-families experimental design; sample sizes by genotype and treatment.</p

Mortality as a function of bacterial dose and MHC genotype among families.

<p>(A) Percent mortality of tadpoles exposed to the control (3.0×10⁶ cfu/ml heat-killed), low (1.0×10⁶ cfu/ml), medium (2.5×10⁶ cfu/ml), and high (3.0×10⁶ cfu/ml) doses of <i>A. hydrophila</i>. N = 90 in each treatment. (B) Percent mortality of tadpoles from each MHC genotype that were exposed to each dose of live <i>A. hydrophila</i> or the control. N = 15 in each condition.</p

Growth as a function of MHC genotype within families.

<p>(A) Total and (B) body length (<i>X̅</i>±SE) of tadpoles on day 18 with different MHC genotypes that were either exposed to live or heat-killed <i>A. hydrophila</i> as a control.</p

Mortality as a function of bacterial exposure and MHC genotype within families.

<p>(A) Percent mortality of tadpoles exposed to live (exposed) and heat-killed (control) <i>A. hydrophila</i>. N = 120 for each treatment. (B) Percent mortality of tadpoles with each MHC genotype from 3 different families. Sample sizes differed among families; see <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0002692#pone-0002692-t001" target="_blank">Table 1</a>.</p

Survival with time as a function of bacterial exposure and MHC genotype within families.

<p>Kaplan-Meier plots showing the survival of (A) tadpoles exposed to live (exposed) or heat-killed (control) <i>A. hydrophila</i>, and (B) tadpoles with different MHC genotypes. Vertical lines indicate exposure days.</p

Survival with time as a function of bacterial dose, MHC genotype, and clutch order among families.

<p>Kaplan-Meier plots showing the survival of (A) tadpoles exposed to the control (3.0×10⁶ cfu/ml heat-killed), low (1.0×10⁶ cfu/ml), medium (2.5×10⁶ cfu/ml), and high (3.0×10⁶ cfu/ml) doses of <i>A. hydrophila</i>; (B) tadpoles exposed to the control or <i>A. hydrophila</i> (all doses combined); (C) tadpoles from each MHC genotype; and (D) tadpoles from early and late clutches.</p

Number of ITS-1 copies collected by filters and swabs.

<p>DNA was extracted using DNeasy kits (A) and PrepMan Ultra (B) for both swabs and filters. (−) denotes negative Bd diagnosis. Error bars indicate 95% confidence limits. Ordinate scale differs below and above axis break.</p

Bd diagnostic methods have changed over time.

<p>(A) Initial histological and immunohistological approaches rapidly have given way to PCR methods, especially qPCR. (B) At first, Bd was diagnosed by collecting toe-clips, sloughed skin, and other tissues but assaying Bd infection by swabbing began in 2006 and quickly became the predominant sampling method. Publication data from Science Citation Index, Zoological Record, and Google Scholar.</p