Skip to main content
. 2021 Feb 15;13(3):e12005. doi: 10.15252/emmm.202012005

Figure 1. COCO inhibits sprouting angiogenesis.

Figure 1

  • A, B
    Representative images of HUVECs (A; n = 6) and HRMECs (B; n = 4) sprouting in a fibrin gel with VEGF (25 ng/ml) in the presence or absence of COCO. Scale bar, 75 μm.
  • C
    Representative images of choroidal explants cultured for 5 days in the presence or absence of COCO. Scale bar, 500 μm.
  • D, E
    Quantification of tube surface area of micrographs shown in (A, B). Results are presented as mean ± SEM; statistical analyses were performed using Mann–Whitney test. (D: *P = 0.0119 (– vs. COCO 30 ng/ml); *P = 0.0108 (– vs. COCO 60 ng/ml); (E: **P = 0.0013 (– vs. COCO 30 ng/ml); ***P = 0.00026 (– vs. COCO 60 ng/ml)).
  • F
    Quantification of sprouting surface area of micrographs shown in (C; n = 6). Results are presented as mean ± SEM, statistical analyses were performed using Mann–Whitney test. *P = 0.0107.
  • G
    COCO decreases scratch wound migration after 18 h. Scale bar, 150 μm.
  • H
    Quantification of wound closure. Results are presented as mean ± SEM, statistical analyses were performed using Mann–Whitney test. **P = 0.0010; (n = 6).
  • I
    COCO decreases EdU incorporation in cultured HUVECs.
  • J
    Quantification of EdU incorporation. Results are presented as mean ± SEM, statistical analyses were performed using Mann–Whitney test. *P = 0.0317; (n = 5).
  • K
    COCO does not induced apoptosis in HUVECs.
  • L
    Quantification of apoptotic (Annexin V‐positive) and viable (Annexin V‐negative) cells (n = 4).