147946.fig.002a
(a)
147946.fig.002b
(b)
147946.fig.002c
(c)
147946.fig.002d
(d)
147946.fig.002e
(e)
147946.fig.002f
(f)
147946.fig.002g
(g)
Figure 2: Cx32 immunofluorescent stainings indicate amplified expression in the ischemic lesion (b) compared to the intact area (a). Inset pictures of (c) and (d) represent double immunofluorescent staining with Cx32 (green) and MAP2 (red). Representative pictures in second row show the extracted area as yellow region of the double immunofluorescent staining from intact (c) and ischemic area (d). The yellow region which stands for Cx32 immunopositive area colocalized with MAP2 shows increased expression in the ischemic periphery. Inset pictures of (e) and (f) represent double immunofluorescent staining with Cx32 (green) and GFAP (red). Representative pictures in third row show the extracted area as yellow region of the double immunofluorescent staining from intact (e) and ischemic area (f). The yellow region which stands for Cx32 immunopositive area colocalized with GFAP seems similar level of the expression between normal and ischemic area. Black bars in graph (g) indicate the average counts of protein expressions. The Cx32 expression was relatively increased in the ischemic area compared to the intact area (†: ). The coexpression of Cx32 and MAP2 was significantly increased in the ischemic lesion as compared to the intact area (**: ). However, there was no statistical difference in Cx32 and GFAP coexpression between intact and ischemic areas. Scale bar indicates 50  m.