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

. 2019 Apr 26;10:1944. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-09770-1

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

© The Author(s) 2019

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

PMC Copyright notice

Fig. 4 — In vivo optogenetic versus electrical stimulation of the vagus nerve. a Cartoon depicting optogenetic and electrical vagus nerve stimulation strategy in ChAT-ChR2-eYFP mice. The right vagus nerve was surgically exposed in anesthetized mice and either light or electricity was used for stimulation. b MIP images of the right nodose/jugular ganglion complex and vagus nerve whole-mount stained with PGP9.5 (red) and GFP (green). c Representative heart rate responses during optogenetic versus electrical right vagus nerve stimulation (RVNS; magenta shading) at identical frequencies (20 Hz) and pulse widths (10 ms) in the intact state. The light pulse power for optogenetic stimulation was 57 mW and the current for electrical stimulation was 5 µA. d Frequency response curves summarizing the effects of optogenetic versus electrical RVNS on heart rate in the intact state. e, f Frequency response curves summarizing the effects of optogenetic versus electrical RVNS of the caudal end on heart rate following right vagotomy (RVNx) (e) and bilateral vagotomy (BVNx) (f). g, h Frequency response curves summarizing the effects of optogenetic versus electrical RVNS of the cranial end on heart rate following RVNx (t₄ = 3.576, *P = 0.0232 at 10 Hz; t₄ = 5.229, **P = 0.0064 at 20 Hz) (g) and BVNx (t₄ = 8.588, **P = 0.0010 at 20 Hz) (h). In d–h insets show a schematic of the stimulation protocol. i The time to peak heart rate response during electrical RVNS in the intact state versus of the cranial end following BVNx (t₄ = 6.335, **P = 0.0032). n = 8 mice (d), three mice (e, f), and five mice (g, h, i); mean ± s.e.m.; paired, two-tailed t-test. Scale bar is 200 µm (b)