Table 2:
ETC Inhibitors
| Inhibitor | glu | erastin | RSL3 | IAA |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| No treatment | 7.8 ± 0.4% | 14.1 ± 4.4% | 12.1 ± 2.5% | 7.2 ± 1.3% |
| Rotenone (1 μM) | 79.2 ± 11.6%**** | 70.7 ± 1.0%**** | 0% | 15.3 ± 1.6 % |
| TTFA (100 μM) | 79.1 ± 6.6%**** | 65.5 ± 25.3%*** | 0% | 30.2 ± 4.0%* |
| Antimycin A (1 μM) | 67.9 ± 10.4%**** | 73.2 ± 12.5%**** | 0% | 5.7 ± 9.8% |
| Myxothiazol (1 μM) | 75.3 ± 4.9%**** | 82.1 ± 2.3%**** | 0% | 0% |
| NaN3 (5 mM) | 89.9 ± 1.2%**** | 85.2 ± 4.3%**** | 0% | 10.7 ± 9.5% |
| FCCP (0.5 μM) | 63.3 ± 6.2%**** | 72.6 ± 2.6%**** | 0% | 44.3 ± 17.7%*** |
ETC inhibitors were tested for their ability to protect mouse HT22 hippocampal cells against glutamate, erastin and RSL3 toxicity at doses that induce 85%-95% cell death. Initially, a range of ETC inhibitor concentrations was tested based on literature reports. The most effective concentrations are reported here. The values presented are the average of a minimum of three independent experiments with all treatments done in triplicate.
p<0.05;
p<0.001;
p<0.0001 versus glutamate, erastin or RSL3 alone.