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

. 2017 Feb 1;4(1):ENEURO.0364-16.2017. doi: 10.1523/ENEURO.0364-16.2017

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

Copyright © 2017 Jareczek et al.

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium provided that the original work is properly attributed.

PMC Copyright notice

Fig. 4. — Persistent inflammatory injury alters the mechanisms by which epibatidine modulates nociception in the rostral ventromedial medulla in a time-dependent manner. A, Microinjection of 5 μg DHβE (☐, n = 8) completely antagonizes while 1 μg MLA (▵, n = 8) does not diminish the antihyperalgesic effect of 4.11 ng epibatidine (Epi) in rats that received an intraplantar injection of CFA 4 h earlier compared to saline (●, n = 9). B, Microinjection of 5 μg DHβE (☐, n = 8) or 1 μg MLA (▵, n = 8) did not antagonize the increase in paw withdrawal latency of the contralateral hind paw in rats that received an intraplantar injection of CFA 4 h earlier compared to saline (●, n = 9). C, Microinjection of 5 μg DHβE (☐, n = 9) only partially antagonizes while 1 μg MLA (▵, n = 5) does not diminish the antihyperalgesic effect of 4.11 ng epibatidine in rats that received an intraplantar injection of CFA 2 weeks earlier compared to saline (●, n = 9). D, Microinjection of 5 μg DHβE (☐, n = 9) or 1 μg MLA (▵, n = 5) before 4.11 ng epibatidine did not alter PWL of the contralateral hind paw in rats that received an intraplantar injection of CFA 2 weeks earlier compared to saline before 4.11 ng epibatidine (●, n = 9). Data are mean ± SEM. BL1 refers to paw withdrawal latency before and BL2 refers to paw withdrawal latency after injection of CFA. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 compared with BL2 values. ^†p < 0.05, ^‡p < 0.01 compared with saline control at the corresponding time point. Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA followed by Holm–Sidak test.