Table 1.

Detailed statistical evaluation of the data in Figure 1A,B

Figure 1A, heat hypersensitivity
Vehicle vs IL-4 50 ng
Time	F(6,96) = 311.1; p < 0.0001
Treatment	F(1,16) = 0.24; p = 0.633
Time × treatment interaction	F(6,96) = 0.43; p = 0.856
Vehicle vs IL-4 100 ng
Time	F(6,96) = 331.89; p < 0.0001
Treatment	F(1,16) = 2.15; p = 0.1616
Time × treatment interaction	F(6,96) = 1.84; p = 0.0992
Vehicle vs IL-4 200 ng
Time	F(6,96) = 277.62; p < 0.0001
Treatment	F(1,16) = 0.28; p = 0.6071
Time × treatment interaction	F(6,96) = 1.70; p = 0.1299
Figure 1B, mechanical hypersensitivity
Vehicle vs IL-4 50 ng
Time	F(6,96) = 176.6; p < 0.0001
Treatment	F(1,16) = 6.76; p = 0.0193
Time × treatment interaction	F(6,96) = 2.949; p = 0.011
Vehicle vs IL-4 100 ng
Time	F(6,96) = 165.0; p < 0.0001
Treatment	F(1,16) = 17.4; p = 0.0007
Time × treatment interaction	F(6,96) = 7.988; p < 0.001
Vehicle vs IL-4 200 ng
Time	F(6,96) = 160.5; p < 0.0001
Treatment	F(1,16) = 57.83; p < 0.0001
Time × treatment interaction	F(6,96) = 13.85; p < 0.0001

All data were analyzed be two-way RM ANOVA.