Anti-Mouse IFNAR-1 - Purified In vivo GOLD Functional Grade

Antibody Details

Product Details

Reactivity Species

Mouse

Host Species

Mouse

Immunogen

This antibody was produced by In vivo genetic immunization of IFNAR1 knockout mice with a plasmid encoding the extracellular domain of murine IFNAR1.

Product Concentration

≥ 5.0 mg/ml

Endotoxin Level

≤ 1.0 EU/mg as determined by the LAL method

Purity

≥95% monomer by analytical SEC

⋅

> 95% by SDS Page

Formulation

This monoclonal antibody is aseptically packaged and formulated in 0.01 M phosphate buffered saline (150 mM NaCl) PBS pH 7.2 - 7.4 with no carrier protein, potassium, calcium or preservatives added.

Product Preparation

Functional grade preclinical antibodies are manufactured in an animal free facility using only In vitro protein free cell culture techniques and are purified by a multi-step process including the use of protein A or G to assure extremely low levels of endotoxins, leachable protein A or aggregates.

Storage and Handling

Functional grade preclinical antibodies may be stored sterile as received at 2-8°C for up to one month. For longer term storage, aseptically aliquot in working volumes without diluting and store at -80°C. Avoid Repeated Freeze Thaw Cycles.

Country of Origin

USA

Shipping

2-8°C

RRID

AB_2491621

Applications and Recommended Usage?
Quality Tested by Leinco

FC The suggested concentration for clone MAR1-5A3 antibody for staining cells in flow cytometry is ≤ 2.0 μg per 10⁶ cells in a volume of 100 μl or 100μl of whole blood. Titration of the reagent is recommended for optimal performance for each application. NOTE: Leinco Technologies suggests using Anti-Mouse IFNAR1-Biotin (With Streptavidin - PE; Part No. S211) (Leinco Product No.: I-402) for flow cytometry of mouse cells

Other Applications Reported In Literature ?

B Clone MAR1-5A3 has a short half-life due to the rapid recycling of cells that express the IFNAR1 receptor. In order to block function In vivo, continual blocking of all compartments is necessary. Therefore, a large loading dose is necessary to saturate all In vivo binding sites and should be maintained to ensure binding site saturation. For In vivo blocking studies, a loading dose of 2.5 mg/mouse, followed by a weekly dose of 0.5 mg/mouse is recommended. The half-life following a 2.5 mg loading dose is approximately 5 days. However, if you fail to saturate the binding sites by injecting a low dose of 250 μg, for example, the half life is only 1.5 days.
WB For Western blotting, the suggested use of this reagent is 1.0 µg per ml (See Data Results) IP
ELISA

Each investigator should determine their own optimal working dilution for specific applications. See directions on lot specific datasheets, as information may periodically change.

Description

Specificity

Clone MAR1-5A3 recognizes an epitope on mouse IFNAR1.

Antigen Distribution

IFNAR1 and IFNAR2 are coexpressed on nearly all cells.

Background

IFNAR1 is a type I membrane protein, that in conjunction with IFNAR2, makes up the heterodimeric receptor that binds all type I IFNs, which includes IFN α and β. Binding and activation of the receptor stimulates Janus protein kinases, which leads to the phosphorylation of several other proteins, namely STAT1 and STAT2. IFNAR1 has also been shown to interact with PRMT1 and Tyrosine kinase 2. Type I IFNs are a family of cytokines that have been shown to promote anti-viral, anti-microbial, anti-tumor and autoimmune responses In vivo.

Antigen Details

Protein

IFNAR1

Ligand/Receptor

IFN-α/β

PubMed

IFNAR1

NCBI Gene Bank ID

15975

UniProt.org

Information on Uniprot.org

References & Citations

1.) Beaver, Jacob T. et al. (2020) Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics 16:9, 2092-2108 Article Link
2.) Theofilopoulos, AN. et al. (2012) J Immunol. 189: 000–000. Article Link
3.) Oldstone, Michael B. A. et al. (2017) Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 114(14): 3708–3713. PubMed
4.) Schreiber, RD et al. (2015) PLoS One.10(5):e0128636PubMed
5.) Shin, Haina et al. (2018) J Virol. 92(7): e00038-18. PubMed
6.) Crack, Peter J. et al. (2016) eNeuro 10.1523/ENEURO.0128-15.2016 Article Link
7.) Sheehan, K. C. F. et al. (2006) JICR 26(11):804
8.) Dunn, G. P. et al. (2005) Nat. Immunol. 6(7):722
9.) Fenner, J. E. et al. (2006) Nat. Immunol. 7(1):33
10). Biron, C. A. et al. (2007) J Exp Med. 204(10): 2383
11.) Raju et al. (2019) Cell Reports. 29:2556–2564 Journal Link
12.) Ortiz et al. (2019) Cancer Cell. 35:33–45 Journal Link
13.) Case et al. (2020) Cell Host & Microbe. 28:465–474 Journal Link
14.) Hassan et al. (2020) Cell. 183:169–184 Journal Link
15.) Hassan et al. (2020) Cell. 182:744–753 Journal Link
16.) Stine et al. (2019) Cell Stem Cell. 25:830–845 Journal Link
17.) White et al. (2018) Cell. 175:1198–1212 Journal Link
18.) Jagger et al. (2017) Cell Host & Microbe. 22:366–376 Journal Link
19.) Richner et al. (2017) Cell. 170:273–283 Journal Link
20.) Richner et al. (2017) Cell. 168:1114–1125 Journal Link

Technical Protocols