$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
The results of the analysis above should yield a restriction ratio of 0.25 or lower for the wild-type SAMHD1 positive control, and 1.0 for the negative control. If these two quality control checks are valid, then consider the statistical significance of the results. SAMHD1 variants that show no significant difference from wild type therefore carry substitutions which do not impact SAMHD1 restriction in this context. Those significantly different from wild type show impaired restriction. If these are not significantly different from the negative control, then they lack the ability to restrict in this context (Figure 4 left panels).
If the wild-type SAMHD1 restriction value is greater than 0.3, then results for tester viruses may be indicative but cannot be relied upon. Ineffective restriction by wild-type protein may result from using U937 cells too early post-recovery from reconstitution (within 2 weeks), or when they are too old (>2-3 months). These parameters may need to be empirically determined for a given cell stock. Typically, the lower the passage, the more reliably the cells differentiate and therefore provide the appropriate environment for SAMHD1 restriction. Inappropriate infection level with either SAMHD1-YFP or HIV-RFP may also result in difficulties with both compensation and downstream determination of restriction ratio. An example is illustrated in the right-hand panels of Figure 4.
If the negative control deviates from 1.0 (outside the range of 0.9-1.2), this may indicate a problem with the analysis, either the proportion of infected cells, gating strategy, or health of the cells are affecting the assay. Refer to NOTES above.

Figure 1: Schematic outlining protocol. VLP, virus-like particles, PMA, phorbol myristate acetate. Numbered stages correspond to stages in protocol. Figure produced using BioRender.com. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 2: Schematic of retroviral plasmids. (A) Packaging vectors (B) Transfer vectors (C) VSV-G envelope expressor. Key coding and regulatory elements are shown. For details refer to the Table of Materials. CMV IE: cytomegalovirus immediate-early promoter, BGH: bovine growth hormone, pA: polyA, RRE: Rev Response Element, CMV-LTR: composite CMV-HIV-1 LTR promoter, Psi: HIV-1 packaging signal, cPPT/CTS: central polypurine tract/central termination sequence, SV40: simian vacuolating virus 40. Figure produced using BioRender.com. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 3: Gating strategy for flow cytometry analysis. (A) Compensation controls: left panel shows FSC-A/SSC-A gating on in-tact cells for the untransduced, uninfected control. Central and right panels show screenshots of single-color compensation controls for YFP (mid) and RFP (right) with uncompensated data in black and compensated in blue. (B) Corresponding compensation matrix and plots for compensation controls above. (C) Gating strategy. Debris is eliminated through analysis of all cells by FSC-A/SSC-A (left panel). Doublets are excluded by gating on FSC height versus area (central panel). Right panel shows an example of HIV-1 restriction by wild-type SAMHD1. Axes show compensated blue and yellow laser fluorescence corresponding to YFP (SAMHD1) and RFP (HIV)-positive cells respectively. Quadrant gates are drawn though comparison of negative and single-color controls for RFP and YFP. Numbers indicate percentage of parent population. Compensation values for YFP with GFP will be much higher but possible to discriminate using appropriate filter sets. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 4: Expected results: ideal versus suboptimal data. (A) Representative YFP/RFP plots for optimal (left) and suboptimal (right) data. Numbers indicate percentage of parent population. In the right panel, HIV infection is too low creating difficulties with compensation and gating. Restriction ratio is higher than expected at 0.5. (B) Plots of restriction ratio for variants of SAMHD1 with respect to wild type (WT, red) or the negative control (HD206-7AA, black) generated using statistical software. Each point represents a replicate value. Mean and standard deviation are shown. Paired t-tests between each group were significant in all cases expect where shown. Left: Ideal data - WT shows the expected restriction of approximately 0.2, negative shows 1.0. The variant R372D (gray) is significantly different from WT but not significant from the negative control and thus has lost the ability to restrict. Right: Suboptimal data. Here, the negative behaves as expected but in all six replicates the WT only shows a restriction ratio of 0.5, due to low infection rate. The low variance within the groups means R143H shows an intermediate phenotype statistically different from WT and the negative, while G209S does not restrict; however, this should be repeated with fresh cells as the positive control has not given the expected restriction ratio. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.