Visitors   Views   Downloads
NOT PEER-REVIEWED
"PeerJ Preprints" is a venue for early communication or feedback before peer review. Data may be preliminary.

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

View peer-reviewed version

Supplemental Information

Additional Information

Competing Interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Véronique Quaglino conceived and designed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, wrote the paper, prepared figures and/or tables, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Yannick Gounden analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, wrote the paper, prepared figures and/or tables, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Emilie Lacot analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, prepared figures and/or tables, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Frédérique Couvillers performed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Amandine Lions performed the experiments, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Mathieu Hainselin analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Human Ethics

The following information was supplied relating to ethical approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers):

All participants could read, write, and understand correctly and were fully informed about the aim of the study and procedure details. They signed an informed consent form, which assured them that their answers would remain confidential and anonymous. The study was carried out according to the local Ethics Committee for Health Research.

Data Deposition

The following information was supplied regarding data availability:

The raw data will be uploaded as supplementary material

Funding

The authors received no funding for this work. Publication fees were supported by the CRPCPO laboratory.


Add your feedback

Before adding feedback, consider if it can be asked as a question instead, and if so then use the Question tab. Pointing out typos is fine, but authors are encouraged to accept only substantially helpful feedback.

Some Markdown syntax is allowed: _italic_ **bold** ^superscript^ ~subscript~ %%blockquote%% [link text](link URL)
 
By posting this you agree to PeerJ's commenting policies