Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 Jun 15.
Published in final edited form as: J Neuroimmunol. 2022 Mar 31;367:577859. doi: 10.1016/j.jneuroim.2022.577859

Figure 5. CD4+ T-cell infiltration and glia response in the optic nerves of OSE mice.

Figure 5.

Immune cell infiltration was detected using anti-CD4 antibody. a) Represent images of CD4+ T-cell staining in the optic nerves of OSE mice. b) Quantification of CD4+ T-cell staining in the optic nerves of OSE mice (F=9.012, p<0.0001. For 8-week: Naïve vs BCRMOG, P>0.9999; Naïve vs OSE, P=0.0346; BCRMOG vs OSE, P=0.0125. For 10-week: Naïve vs BCRMOG, P=>0.9999; Naïve vs OSE, P=0.0015; BCRMOG vs OSE, P=0.0002). Glia cell response was detected with anti-GFAP and IBA1 antibody. c) Representative images of GFAP staining in the optic nerves of OSE mice. d) Quantification of GFAP staining in the optic nerves of OSE mice (F=26.33, p<0.0001. For 8-week: Naïve vs BCRMOG, P=0.2696; Naïve vs OSE, P<0.0001; BCRMOG vs OSE, P<0.0001. For 10-week: Naïve vs BCRMOG, P=6606; Naïve vs OSE, P<0.0001; BCRMOG vs OSE, P<0.0001). e) Representative images of IBA1 staining in the optic nerves of OSE mice. f) Quantification of IBA1 staining in the optic nerves of OSE mice. Each dot from bar graph represents one mouse (F=16.75, p<0.0001. For 8-week: Naïve vs BCRMOG, P=0.4561; Naïve vs OSE, P<0.0001; BCRMOG vs OSE, P=0.0002. For 10-week: Naïve vs BCRMOG, P=0.9996; Naïve vs OSE, P<0.0001; BCRMOG vs OSE, P<0.0001). Significance between groups was assessed by One-way ANOVA (* P ≤ 0.05, ** P ≤ 0.01, *** P ≤ 0.001, N.S. = no significance). Error bars represent SEM. Scale bar =50μm.