Table 2.
Effects of MIF on electrophysiological measures of excitability in NA neurons isolated from Naive, Sham, and SCI ratsa
| MIF (ng/ml) | 0 | 0.1 | 0.5 | 1 | 10 | Test | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Naive | RMP (mV) | –65.3 (–77, –51.6) (39) | –63.2 (–90.7, –58.1) (16) | –64.1 (–70.9, –53) (12) | –49.3 (–67, –40) (18)*** | –57 (–66.1, –44.9) (11)* | KW |
| AP voltage threshold (mV) | –31.6 (–37.2, –16.3) (39) | –33.6 (–40.2, –21.2) (16) | –34.9 (–48.6, –27.1) (12) | –36.7 (–50.1, –27.3) (18)** | –32.5 (–40, –23) (11) | KW | |
| Rheobase (pA) | 115 (15, 240) (39) | 160 (5, 275) (16) | 85 (5, 225) (12) | 50 (5, 180) (18)*** | 120 (30, 200) (11) | KW | |
| MIF (ng/ml) | 0 | 0.1 | 0.5 | — | — | ||
| Sham | RMP (mV) | –60.6 (–75.6, –50.6) (21) | –60.5 (–71.4, –40) (23) | –59.5 (–70, –44) (15) | — | — | KW |
| AP voltage threshold (mV) | –30.2 (–38.8, –22.5) (21) | –27.1 (–39.4, –18.2) (23) | –30.6 (–53.4, –26.2) (14) | — | — | KW | |
| Rheobase (pA) | 85 (10, 265) (21) | 140 (0, 430) (23) | 105 (5, 220) (15) | — | — | KW | |
| MIF (ng/ml) | 0 | 0.01 | 0.1 | 1 | — | ||
| SCI | RMP (mV) | –48.4 (–71.4, –40) (19) | –54.2 (–78.7, –40.3) (9) | –48.8 (–68.4, –42.1) (6) | –64.3 (–68.5, –46.4) (3) | — | BF |
| AP voltage threshold (mV) | –34.4 (–47.3, –29.1) (19) | –36.5 (–46.5, –20.3) (9) | –37.3 (–45.3, –32.4) (6) | –29.6 (–34.5, –23.5) (3) | — | KW | |
| Rheobase (pA) | 35 (5, 75) (19) | 65 (10, 165) (9) | 20 (5, 120) (6) | 85 (75, 340) (3)* | — | KW |
aValues are reported as medians (minimum, maximum) (number of cells sampled). Each dose of MIF was compared against vehicle treatment (0 ng/ml). Statistical tests: BF, Brown–Forsythe and Welch ANOVA test followed by Dunnett's T3 multiple comparison test; KW, Kruskal–Wallis test followed by Dunn's multiple comparison test.
*p < 0.05.
**p < 0.01.
***p < 0.001.