Skip to main content
. 2010 Jul 21;35(11):2249–2261. doi: 10.1038/npp.2010.99

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Effects of sub-CUS and CUS on WIN 55 212-2-induced depression of fEPSPs in the NAc. (a) Sub-CUS had no significant effect on WIN 55 212-2 (2 μM)-induced depression of fEPSPs (p>0.05; n=6–7), and the effect of WIN 55 212-2 was reversed by subsequent addition of the CB1 antagonist AM 251 (4 μM). (b) CUS significantly attenuated the effects of WIN 55 212-2 on fEPSPs (p<0.05; n=6–7). (c, d) Concentration–response curves for WIN 55 212-2-induced depression of fEPSPs in NAc slices from control, sub-CUS, control, and CUS groups. CUS, but not sub-CUS, decreased the maximal effect of WIN 55 212-2. Neither sub-CUS nor CUS significantly affected the EC50 or Hill slope of the dose–response curves (see Table 2 for detailed statistics).