Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Mar 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Struct Biol. 2008 Dec 24;165(3):176–183. doi: 10.1016/j.jsb.2008.11.013

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Comparison of normalized sulfated GAG distributions between planes by treatment case. Left Pane – Control GAG distribution by plane. Note the good agreement of AP and ML planes across the range of angles. Middle Pane – ChB treated GAG distribution by plane. Again there is good agreement between AP and ML planes. Right Pane – DS GAG distribution by plane. Profiles were derived from the difference between Control and ChB treated curves. As with both Control and ChB panes, the AP and ML planes show good agreement while the transverse plane is relatively flat.