SBT3.2 Antibody

Shipped with Ice Packs
In Stock

Product Specs

Buffer
Preservative: 0.03% Proclin 300
Constituents: 50% Glycerol, 0.01M Phosphate Buffered Saline (PBS), pH 7.4
Form
Liquid
Lead Time
Made-to-order (14-16 weeks)
Synonyms
SBT3.2 antibody; At1g32970 antibody; F9L11.14 antibody; Subtilisin-like protease SBT3.2 antibody; EC 3.4.21.- antibody; Subtilase subfamily 3 member 2 antibody; AtSBT3.2 antibody
Target Names
SBT3.2
Uniprot No.

Target Background

Database Links
Protein Families
Peptidase S8 family
Subcellular Location
Secreted.

Q&A

Here’s a structured collection of FAQs tailored for academic researchers investigating antibodies like "SBT3.2," synthesized from peer-reviewed methodologies and experimental frameworks:

Advanced Research Questions

What experimental design principles apply when studying antibody efficacy against evolving viral variants?

  • Key parameters:

    • Normalized neutralization titer: Calculate using IC50=DosePotency\text{IC}_{50} = \frac{\text{Dose}}{\text{Potency}}, where potency is derived from reference strains .

    • Timing: Administer antibodies pre-exposure or within 72 hours post-infection for optimal efficacy (p<0.0001p < 0.0001) .

    • Dose-response modeling: Use mixed-effects regression to predict efficacy against emerging variants (e.g., Omicron BQ.1.1) .

How to resolve contradictions between in vitro neutralization and in vivo protection data?

  • Analytical framework:

    • FactorImpactMitigation Strategy
      Epitope accessibility in vivoHighUse tissue-specific antigen presentation assays
      Fc-mediated effector functionsModerateEngineer IgG subclass variants (e.g., IgG1 vs. IgG3)
      Immune complex formationVariableMeasure complement deposition via C1q binding assays

What computational tools are recommended for predicting antibody-antigen interactions?

  • Workflow:

    • Homology modeling: Use SWISS-MODEL or Rosetta to predict paratope-epitope interfaces.

    • Molecular dynamics: Simulate binding stability with GROMACS (≥100 ns trajectories).

    • Neutralization escape prediction: Apply deep mutational scanning data from platforms like Bloom Lab .

Data Interpretation Guidance

How to assess antibody therapeutic potential when in vitro data shows high potency but animal models show limited efficacy?

  • Critical checks:

    • Verify antibody half-life (t1/2t_{1/2}) using radiolabeled pharmacokinetic studies.

    • Test for target-mediated drug disposition (TMDD) via nonlinear PK modeling.

    • Evaluate tissue penetration using biodistribution imaging (e.g., PET-CT with 89Zr-labeled antibodies).

What statistical methods are appropriate for analyzing antibody dose-response relationships?

  • Recommendations:

    • Fit data to a 4-parameter logistic model:

      E=Emin+EmaxEmin1+10(log10(EC50)log10(D))Hill SlopeE = E_{\text{min}} + \frac{E_{\text{max}} - E_{\text{min}}}{1 + 10^{(\log_{10}(\text{EC}_{50}) - \log_{10}(D)) \cdot \text{Hill Slope}}}
    • Use Akaike information criterion (AIC) to compare monotherapy vs. combination Synergy models .

Quick Inquiry

Personal Email Detected
Please use an institutional or corporate email address for inquiries. Personal email accounts ( such as Gmail, Yahoo, and Outlook) are not accepted. *
© Copyright 2025 TheBiotek. All Rights Reserved.