Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Sep 1.
Published in final edited form as: Int J Radiat Biol. 2014 Aug 11;90(9):799–806. doi: 10.3109/09553002.2014.938278

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Part A- Reversal data of Day 1 savings with Sham and IR-39 both performing better than IR-30 rats (*p<0.05). While the trend for this remained over the 4 days of DMP testing (part B), results were no longer significantly different. The difference between Sham and IR-30 rats was marginally significant (p<0.06) while the difference between IR-30 and IR-39 was not (p<0.16). Error bars indicate the standard error of the mean (SEM).