Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: Exp Eye Res. 2017 May 30;161:17–29. doi: 10.1016/j.exer.2017.05.011

Figure 3. Effect of cumene hydroperoxide on subconfluent rMC-1 cells (a rat Müller cell line).

Figure 3

CaAM and SO assays carried out on rMC-1 cells following incubation with CuOOH, in a dose range of 10 to 50 μM, plus VC (the last using MEBSS diluent alone). A: CaAM assay shows dose-response to increasing concentrations of CuOOH, with almost complete abrogation of calcein fluorescence signal at the highest dose tested. RFU values were normalized to the mean RFU (4833 ± 652) for VC. *P≤0.05 vs. VC. B: The SO assay was applied immediately following the CaAM assay, resulting in a near mirror-image pattern of signal through the dose range of CuOOH. RFU values were normalized to the mean RFU for VC, and the maximal mean response (for 50 μM CuOOH) was 15,165 ± 1380. Statistically significant differences vs. VC (*P≤0.05) were achieved at CuOOH concentrations of 20 μM and above. Error bars in both charts are [1.96 × SE].