TABLE 1

Significance (P value) of differential expression in Figures 1, 2 and 3 determined by one-way analysis of variance and Tukey's post-hoc analysis

Gene SymbolUninfected versusHnf1a + Hnf4a versus
Hnf1Hnf4Hnf1 + Hnf4Hnf1Hnf4
Abcb1a (Mdr1a)***********
Abcb1 1 (Bsep)*********
Abcc2 (Mrp2)a************
Abcc4 (Mrp4)**********
Abcg2 (Bcrp1)**********
Cdh1*********
Cdh6****
Cdh26************
Cldn12****
Cldn6a*************
Cldn9******
Dsc2****
Dsg2****
Dsp****
Ocln**********
Slc22a4 (Octn1)******
Slc22a6 (Oat1)a*********
Slc22a12 (Urat1)***********
Slc34a1a*********
Slc47a1 (Mate1)a*********
Slc51a (Osta)a*********
Slc51b (Ostb)a*********
Slco1a6 (Oatp1a6)a*********
Slco2a1 (Oatp2a1)**********
Tjp2a******
Pard6b**********
  • a Expression was more robust in presence of both transcription factors.

  • The statistical significance of the differential expression as determined by one-way ANOVA and Tukey's post-hoc analysis of the various genes is shown (-No significant difference in expression; *P ≥ 0.05; **P ≥ 0.01; ***P ≥ 0.005).

  • Column 1 is uninfected MEFs versus those expressing Hnf1 alone; column 2 is uninfected MEFS versus those expressing Hnf4 alone; and column 3 is uninfected MEFs versus those expressing a combination of Hnf1 and Hnf4; column 4 is MEFs expressing both transcription factors versus those expressing Hnf1 alone;and column 5 is MEFs expressing both transcription factors versus those expressing Hnf4 alone.