Fig. 6. GA reverse SD-induced synaptic impairment and the change of oxidative stress factor. (A) Sample traces showing sEPSCs. (B) There are no changes of average sEPSC amplitude both in each group. Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, Control vs. SD+Saline, p=0.819; SD+Saline vs. SD+GA, p=0.819. Saline, SD+Saline, SD+GA group, n=20 cells in 5 mice of each group. Control+GA group, n=10 cells in 4 mice. (C)The frequency of sEPSCs is decreased by SD and GA reversed this to control level. One-way ANOVA with Tukey’s multiple comparisons test. Control vs. SD+Saline, p =0.05; SD+Saline vs. SD+GA, p =0.04; Control vs. Control+GA, p=0.762. Control, SD+Saline, SD+GA group, n=20 cells in 5 mice of each group. Control+GA group, n=10 cells in 4 mice (D) Sample traces showing sIPSCs. (E, F) The inhibition synaptic transmission in pyramidal neurons is not affected by SD and GA. Amplitude: Kolmogorov-Smirnov test, Control vs. SD+Saline, p=0.847; SD+Saline vs. SD+GA, p=0.99. Frequency: one-way ANOVA with Tukey’s test. Control vs. SD+Saline, p=0.739; SD+Saline vs. SD+GA, p=0.996; Control vs. Control+GA, p=0.443. n=12 cells in 4 Control mice, n=12 cells in 4 SD+Saline mice, n=9 cells in 4 SD+GA mice, n=10 cells in 4 Control+GA mice. (G, H) The levels of MDA and the activity of SOD detected by spectrophotometric method. One-way ANOVA with Tukey’s test. MDA: Control vs. Control+SD, p=0.047; Control+SD vs. SD+GA, p<0.001. n=16 mice per group. SOD: Control vs. Control+SD, p<0.001; Control+SD vs. SD+GA, p<0.001. n=15 mice per group. (I) The expression of Nrf2 in the cortex detected by Elisa. One-way ANOVA with Tukey’s test. Control vs. Control+SD, p=0.049; Control+SD vs. SD+GA, p=0.005. n=a. All data are shown as mean±SEM. ***p<0.001, **p<0.01, *p<0.05, ns, not significant.
© Exp Neurobiol
