Skip to main content
. 2017 Jan 30;114(9):E1707–E1716. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1612136114

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2.

Sensory and motor behaviors in WT and αBC−/− mice after sciatic nerve crush. DigiGait analysis of (A) swing duration, (B) stance duration, (C) braking duration, (D) propulsion duration, and (E) paw area in naïve and 28-d postcrushed WT (white bars) and αBC−/− (black bars) mice (representative of two experiments; n = 3–5 mice per group). (F) RotaRod test performed on naïve (N; white and black circles) and 28-d injured (I; white and black triangles) WT (white symbols) and αBC−/− (black symbols) mice (one experiment; n = 9–10 animals per group). (G) SFI examination and SFI difference in WT (circles and white bar) and αBC−/− (triangles and black bar) mice before (N) and 28 d after crush injury (I; representative of two experiments; n = 9–10 mice per group). (H) Dynamic plantar test in naïve, sham, and 28-d injured WT (white bars) and αBC−/− (black bars) mice (one experiment; n = 9–10 animals per group). (I) von Frey Hair examination in sham (S) and 28-d injured (I) WT (circles) and αBC−/− (triangles) animals (representative of two experiments; n = 7–10 mice per group). (J) Hargreaves test in naïve (N) and injured WT and αBC−/− mice at 28 and 56 d after sham (S) and injury (I) surgeries (representative of two experiments; n = 7–10 mice per group). All data were analyzed using two-way repeated measures ANOVA and represent mean ± SEM. *P < 0.05.