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

. 2016 Dec 7;117(2):836–845. doi: 10.1152/jn.00619.2016

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

Copyright © 2017 the American Physiological Society

PMC Copyright notice

Fig. 5. — A_2A receptor agonist-induced pMF is unaffected by LPS. A–C: representative traces of compressed integrated phrenic neurograms following intrathecal CGS-21680. A: LPS treatment and intrathecal CGS-21680 shows increases in burst amplitude vs. BL. B: saline treatment and intrathecal CGS-21680 shows increased amplitude vs. BL. C: the time control group given intrathecal vehicle, aCSF, did not show any time-dependent increase in phrenic burst amplitude. D: group data for phrenic amplitude as a %change from BL. LPS + CGS-21680 (circles; n = 6) and saline + CGS-21680 (squares; n = 6) are compared with aCSF-treated rats (triangle; n = 10). After intrathecal CGS-21680, pMF persisted at least 90 min. There was a significant difference from time control (#P < 0.05) for LPS + CGS-21680 and saline + CGS-21680 vs. aCSF at 30, 60, and 90 min. There was no significant difference between LPS + CGS-21680 and saline + CGS-21680 at any time. E: group data for phrenic burst frequency (bursts/min). LPS + CGS-21680 and saline + CGS-21680 are compared with aCSF (time control) protocols. The LPS + CGS-21680 group was significantly different from time control (#P < 0.05) at 90 min. The saline + CGS-21680 group was significantly different from time Control (#P < 0.05) at 30 min.