Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2009 Aug 12.
Published in final edited form as: J Neurosci. 2008 Jun 18;28(25):6407–6418. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1425-08.2008

Figure 2. Characterization of fractions purified by a methanol-water gradient on an ODS column.

Figure 2

(A) Normalized responses on 69 individual electrodes from 3 preparations to each of 120 different fractions. Neurons are on rows, fractions on columns; color scale indicates relative amplitude of response. Note the prevalence of responses to only a few bands of fractions, of which the major ones are highlighted by the black rectangles. The band of fractions in the leftmost rectangle (solid line) was pooled and then further separated by HPLC (resulting in “sub-fractions”) for the data in the remaining panels of this figure.

(B) Example of a re-purified sub-fraction dominated by a single peak (m/z 427) on ESI/MS. Ion abundance is normalized to the intensity of that ion.

(C) Physiological testing of the sub-fraction in (B) (79 electrodes from 2 preparations). The estimated concentration of SS427 in the sub-fraction was 20 μM.

(D) and (E) plot the firing rate change measured on two electrodes across sub-fractions (black curve) and the relative abundance of a particular ion across the same sub-fractions (red curve). The sub-fraction numbers in panels (D) and (E) refer to two different repurifications of the first band of fractions in (A) (solid rectangle). Error bars indicate standard error of the mean (s.e.m.) across trials.