Table 1.
ΔCMRO2/CMRO2 | Δν/ν | ΔS/S | |
---|---|---|---|
Stimulation increment (from baseline I) | 0.40 ± 0.13 | 0.29 ± 0.13 | 0.02 ± 0.01 |
Baseline decrement (from baseline I to baseline II) | −0.32 ± 0.08 | −0.29 ± 0.11 | −0.03 ± 0.01 |
Stimulation increment (from baseline II) | 1.02 ± 0.22 | 1.04 ± 0.32 | 0.05 ± 0.02 |
ΔCMRO2/CMRO2 was averaged across all rats (n = 6) from 2 × 2 voxels in contralateral forepaw region (9). ΔCMRO2/CMRO2 was calculated from ΔCBF/CBF − {(ΔS/S)/Á + ΔCBV/CBV}(1 + ΔCBF/CBF), where Á has been determined (8). Although absolute values of CMRO2 were not measured directly, the use of the data obtained in the baseline of condition I allowed all increments and decrements in activity to be normalized to that baseline value (Fig. 2, Table 2).
Δν/ν was averaged across all rats (n = 36) from all extracellular recordings in the contralateral side (9). Δν/ν was measured at a depth of layer 4 where ≈60% of the data showed an increase, ≈10% of the data showed a decrease, and ≈30% of the data showed no change (9). The absolute values of ν for the two baseline conditions were significantly different (9.5 ± 2.4 and 6.7 ± 1.8 Hz; P < 0.01), whereas the two stimulation conditions were approximately similar (12.3 ± 4.0 and 13.7 ± 3.2 Hz; P > 0.25). Because absolute values of ν were measured in all conditions, the relative changes were directly obtained from comparison of ν values obtained in the different conditions (Fig. 2, Table 2).