Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2011 Jul 28.
Published in final edited form as: Int Rev Neurobiol. 2009;88:65–100. doi: 10.1016/S0074-7742(09)88004-5

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3

Immunohistochemical changes in albumin (a, d, g), myelin basic protein (MBP; b, e, g) and glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP; c, f, i) in control (left vertical panel) and METH-treated rats (23°: middle vertical panel and 29°C: right vertical panel). Compared to weak albumin immunoreactivity in control (a, arrowhead), METH-treated rats had stronger immonoreactivity (arrows in d and g). Expansion of neuropil and sponginess is also evident in the surrounding background. Bar (a, d, g) = 40 µm. In contrast to intense red myelin bundles and dense red fibers in control (b, arrowheads, b), diminution of red staining in the bundles and fibers (e, arrows) was seen in METH-treated rats (e). This degradation of MBP was most prominent in the rats treated with METH at 29° C (arrows, h). Bar (b, e, h) = 30 µm. GFAP immunostaining was prominent in METH-treated rat at 29° C (i, arrows) compared to 23°C (f, arrows). Control rats (c) occasionally show few GFAP positive astrocytes (arrowhead). Reactive astrocytes were located around the nerve cells and microvessels, and distributed in wide regions in the neuropil. Damaged neurons can also be seen in the background. Bar (c, f, i) = 40 µm.