Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 Jan 1.
Published in final edited form as: Exp Neurol. 2009 Oct 31;221(1):166–174. doi: 10.1016/j.expneurol.2009.10.019

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Effects of PPBP treatment on nNOS expression and activity in putamen of sham-operated or H–I piglets at 3 h of recovery (n = 4 to 6 per group). (A) nNOS expression was greater in the cytosol (cyto)-enriched fraction of putamen than in the membrane (mem)-enriched fraction. Ponceau S was used as a loading control. H–I increased the nNOS level in the membrane-enriched fraction (B), but not in the cytosol-enriched fraction (C). PPBP alleviated H–I–potentiated nNOS expression in the membrane-enriched fraction. Immunoprecipitation with antibody against NR2A/2B resulted in the co-precipitation of nNOS in the membrane-enriched putamen fraction (D) and prefrontal cortex (E). However, H–I increased the interaction between nNOS and NR2 only in the putamen [as seen by an increase in optical density (OD) ratio] (D). The increase was restored to control levels by PPBP treatment. (F) PPBP treatment alleviated H–I–induced NOS activity in membrane enriched fraction of putamen. All data are shown as means ± s.d., normalized to the sham+saline value. *P < 0.05 versus sham+saline group; #P < 0.05 versus HI+ saline group; one-way ANOVA followed by the Student-Newman-Keuls test.