Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2025 Sep 16.
Published in final edited form as: Structure. 2025 Aug 26;33(11):1831–1843.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.str.2025.07.022

Figure 3. Change in structural and biophysical characteristics of ISGs under maturation stimuli.

Figure 3.

(A) Top – representative orthoslice insets of ISGs under the influence of the different stimuli show variations in size and ISG LAC. Bottom – ISG graphic renderings of the ISGs on top show differences in core size and density as reflected by black crystalline cores for conditions affecting maturation the most and shaded gray dense cores for stimuli not significantly increasing maturation. (B-D) Mean ISG LAC versus ISG diameter plot for pooled ISGs in a condition. Each point represents a single ISG. ISG LAC and Diameter distribution is shown in histogram plots. Mean ISG LAC and ISG Diameter along with comparison in these parameters between conditions shown in box and whisker plots. As compared to ISGs from Unstimulated (white) (n = 5918) and Glucose-treated (Red) (n=4750) cells, ISGs from: (B) Glimepiride-treated (yellow) (n = 4359) cells show a slight shift in ISG LAC and diameter; (C) GKA-50-treated (n = 4044) (green) cells (show an increase in ISG LAC and decrease in diameter; (D) TAK-875 (purple) treated (n = 5506) cells show an increase in ISG LAC and in ISG diameter; (E) GIP (cyan) (n = 8363), and Ex-4-treated (n = 3362) cells (blue), show an greater increase in ISG LAC for Ex-4 as compared to GIP and similar decrease in ISG diameter for both conditions.*p<0.05; **p<0.01: ***p<0.001; ****p<0.0001 as calculated using a One-way ANOVA with Dunnet’s correction.