Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Jun 19.
Published in final edited form as: Mucosal Immunol. 2016 Nov 16;10(4):971–982. doi: 10.1038/mi.2016.98

Figure 6. Following IsPreFeH, SAMP × NOD2−/− mice show reduced severity of DSS colitis compared to WT mice.

Figure 6

After 4 days of exposure to a composite mixture of feces and bedding material (orally gavaged), SAMP WT and NOD2−/− mice were treated with 3% DSS in their drinking water for 7 days (n=6/group). (A) Changes in body weight during DSS treatment (AUC, Student’s t test P < 0.05). (B) Endoscopic score based on a distal-proximal endoscopic colitis scoring system on day 7. (Mann–Whitney, ** P < 0.01); data are represented as mean ± SEM. (C) Endoscopic images of perianal, distal and proximal colon after DSS treatment show severe inflammation in SAMP WT mice (thickened appearance of the mucosa, and numerous ulcers - yellow arrows) compared to mild inflammation in SAMP × NOD2−/− mice. (D) Representative histopathology images at same magnification show thickening and increased cellular infiltration in lamina propria of SAMP WT mice. (E) Histological, total, chronic and active colonic inflammation scores (Mann–Whitney, ** P < 0.01, * P < 0.05). (F) MPO activity in colonic tissue after DSS treatment. (G) IL-13 in colonic tissue after DSS treatment (Mann–Whitney, * P < 0.05); data are represented as mean ± SEM.

HHS Vulnerability Disclosure