Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2012 Oct 16;61(11):2967–2979. doi: 10.2337/db11-1824

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

© 2012 by the American Diabetes Association.

Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered. See http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/ for details.

PMC Copyright notice

FIG. 6. — Effect of PKC activation (PMA), knockdown, or blocking of GLP-1R on exendin-4 (Ex-4)-stimulated inhibition of Ang II on phospho–c-Raf (p-c-Raf)(Ser338), phospho-Erk1/2 (p-Erk1/2), and PAI-1 activity in RGECs. A: Immunoblots of phospho–c-Raf(Ser259), phospho–c-Raf(Ser338), and phospho-Erk1/2 in RGECs stimulated with PMA (100 nmol/L) in the presence or absence of exendin-4 are shown. **P < 0.001 vs. PMA⁻/exendin-4⁻ and †P < 0.05 vs. PMA⁺/exendin-4⁻. B: Immunoblots of phospho–c-Raf(Ser338) and phospho-Erk1/2 in RGECs stimulated with PMA in the presence or absence of GFX or RBX. *P < 0.05 vs. PMA⁻/GFX⁻/RBX⁻; †P < 0.05 vs. PMA⁺/GFX⁻/RBX⁻. C: Immunoblots of phospho–c-Raf(Ser338) and phospho-Erk1/2 in RGECs stimulated with Ang II in the presence or absence of GFX or RBX. *P < 0.05 vs. Ang II⁻/GFX⁻/RBX⁻; †P < 0.05 vs. Ang II⁺/GFX⁻/RBX⁻. D: Immunoblots of phospho–c-Raf(Ser259), phospho–c-Raf(Ser338), and phospho-Erk1/2 in RGECs transfected with small interfering GLP-1R or small interfering control, stimulated with Ang II in the presence or absence of exendin-4. **P < 0.001 vs. small interfering control/Ang II⁻/exendin-4⁻; †P < 0.05 vs. siControl/Ang II⁻/exendin-4⁺; ‡P < 0.05 vs. siControl/Ang II⁺/exendin-4⁻; ¶P < 0.05 vs. siControl/Ang II⁺/exendin-4⁺. E: Immunoblots of phospho–c-Raf(Ser259), phospho–c-Raf(Ser338), and phospho-Erk1/2 in RGECs stimulated with Ang II in the presence or absence of exendin-4 or exendin-3(9-39) [Ex-3(9-39)] are shown. **P < 0.001 vs. Ang II⁻/exendin-4⁻/exendin-3(9-39)⁻; †P < 0.05 vs. Ang II⁻/exendin-4⁺/exendin-3(9-39)⁻; ‡P < 0.05 vs. Ang II⁺/exendin-4⁻/exendin-3(9-39)⁻; ¶P < 0.05 vs. Ang II⁺/exendin-4⁺/exendin-3(9-39)⁻. One of three independently performed experiments is shown. Comparisons were made between groups using either two-sample and paired t tests for two-way comparisons or one-way ANOVA for multiple groups to establish statistically significant differences. Results are expressed as means ± SD. AU, arbitrary units.