Photomicrographs showing NFILS-IR nerve fibers in TPL cervix (a) and a NFILS-IR nerve fascicle in NP corpus (b)

<p><b>Copyright information:</b></p><p>Taken from "Influence of pregnancy and labor on the occurrence of nerve fibers expressing the capsaicin receptor TRPV1 in human corpus and cervix uteri"</p><p>http://www.rbej.com/content/6/1/8</p><p>Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E 2008;6():8-8.</p><p>Published online 12 Feb 2008</p><p>PMCID:PMC2254422.</p><p></p> Box plots show the distribution of NFILS-IR nerve fibers in corpus and cervix uteri. NFILS positive fibers were seen in the stroma and in the subepithelial region (a, short arrows). Nerve fibers penetrating the basal epithelium were observed, but only rarely (a, long arrow). A NFILS-IR nerve fascicle is seen in control, non-pregnant corpus (b). Scale bars = 50 μm. The box plot in (c) shows the distribution of NFILS-IR nerve fibers in the three groups of the corpus counted as nerve fibers/mm. There is a significant decrease of IR-nerve fibres/mmin the term pregnant group compared to non-pregnant controls, p < 0.0001. A statistically significant decrease of IR-nerve fibers/mmis also observed in labor compared to the non-pregnant group, p < 0.01. There is no significant difference between TP and TPL. Comparison of NFILS-IR nerve fibers between the "corpus groups" presented as total count of positive nerves also shows significantly different values (d). There is a statistically significant decrease in the occurrence of IR nerve fibers in the term pregnant compared to the non-pregnant corpus, p < 0.001, and between the non-pregnant group compared to the term pregnant in labor, p < 0.05. However, there is no significant difference between the two pregnant groups. The box plot in (e) shows and compares the distribution of NFILS-IR nerve fibers in the cervical groups. Values did not reach statistical significance

Photomicrographs showing TRPV1-IR nerve fibers in TP cervix (a-c) and a TRPV1-IR nerve fascicle in NP corpus (d)

<p><b>Copyright information:</b></p><p>Taken from "Influence of pregnancy and labor on the occurrence of nerve fibers expressing the capsaicin receptor TRPV1 in human corpus and cervix uteri"</p><p>http://www.rbej.com/content/6/1/8</p><p>Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E 2008;6():8-8.</p><p>Published online 12 Feb 2008</p><p>PMCID:PMC2254422.</p><p></p> Box plots show the distribution of cervical TRPV1-IR nerve fibers. TRPV1-IR nerve fibers were observed subepithelially (a, arrows) and in the stroma (b, arrow) as well as around blood vessels (c, arrows). Scale bars = 50 μm. TRPV1-IR nerve fibers did not differ significantly between the groups either when presented as total count of positive nerve fibers (e) or as TRPV1 positive nerve fibers/mm(f

Determination of oligomeric status of HpDprA and its domains.

<p>Elution chromatograms of purified HpDprA at 2 mg/ml and 1 mg/ml <b>(A)</b> concentrations are depicted. Similarly, the size exclusion profiles of HpRF at 2 mg/ml at 1 mg/ml <b>(B)</b> and HpDML1 at 8 mg/ml at 2 mg/ml <b>(C)</b> are depicted. <b>(D)</b> Table shows elution volume (V_e) and corresponding molecular weight of the elution peaks shown in (<b>A, B</b> and <b>C</b>). Elution was monitored using UV absorbance at 230 nm wavelength. The column was equilibrated in the same buffer as the protein samples (1X PBS). Total 500 µl sample was injected for each chromatophic experiment. The apparent molecular mass was calculated from elution volume using molecular weight standards as described in materials and methods.</p

Surface plasmon resonance analysis of HpDprA, HpRF and HpDML1 interaction with DNA.

<p>Different concentrations of full length HpDprA <b>(A)</b>HpRF<b>(C)</b> and HpDML1<b>(E)</b> were injected on to the immobilized single stranded DNA (90 mer, ~1000 RU) surface in buffer containing 150 mM NaCl. Both sample injection and buffer injection were carried out as described in materials and methods. Similarly, binding sensorgrams were obtained for the interaction of dsDNA (90 bp, ~1000 RU) with full length HpDprA <b>(B)</b>HpRF<b>(D)</b> and HpDML1<b>(F)</b>. Sensorgrams depicting changes in response unit (the y—axis) as a function of time (the x—axis) are shown. The concentrations of soluble analytes and affinity constant (K_d) values are indicated in the inset to the figures.</p

Surface plasmon resonance analysis of HpDprA mutants interaction with DNA.

<p>Different concentrations of <b>(A)</b>HpDprA^R48A/R49Aand <b>(C)</b>HpDprA^{R48A/R49A/K133A} were injected on the single stranded DNA surface in standard buffer containing 150 mM NaCl. Both sample injection and buffer injection were carried out as described in materials and methods. Representative sensorgrams illustrating changes in the response units (the y—axis) as a function of time (the x-axis) are shown. Similarly, binding sensorgrams were obtained for the interaction of dsDNA with <b>(B)</b>HpDprA^R48A/R49Aand <b>(D)</b>HpDprA^{R48A/R49A/K133A}. The concentrations of soluble analytes and affinity constant (K_d) values are indicated in the inset to the figures. The K_d values are determined as described in materials and methods.</p

Secondary structure composition of full length HpDprA and its individual domains.

<p>The secondary structure of individual proteins have been calculated using K2D2, a web server to estimate the α helix and β strand content of a protein from its circular dichroism spectrum and compared with the % α –helix and % β sheet calculated from HpDprA structure published by Wang et. al., (2014). RMSD values depicting goodness of fit has been shown in bracket<b>.</b></p><p>Secondary structure composition of full length HpDprA and its individual domains.</p

Nuclease protection assay.

<p><b>(A)</b> Schematic illustration of nuclease protection assay. ³²P-labeled dsDNA (0.5 nM) either alone (lane 2) or pre-bound with increasing concentrations of HpDprA <b>(B)</b> or HpRF<b>(C)</b> {100, 200, 400, 600, 800, 1000 (nM), lanes 3–8} was incubated for 30 min with 1 unit of DNaseI. Similarly, ³²P-labeled ssDNA (0.5 nM) either alone (lane 2) or pre-bound with above mentioned concentrations of HpDprA <b>(D)</b> or HpRF<b>(E)</b>was incubated for 30 min with 1 unit of mung bean endonuclease. Lane 1: DNAalone.</p

Contact Heat Evoked Potentials (Aδ) from a control subject (left panel) and a patient (right panel) on stimulation of different regions (reported from FCz electrode)

<p><b>Copyright information:</b></p><p>Taken from "Use of the novel contact heat evoked potential stimulator (CHEPS) for the assessment of small fibre neuropathy: correlations with skin flare responses and intra-epidermal nerve fibre counts"</p><p>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2377/7/21</p><p>BMC Neurology 2007;7():21-21.</p><p>Published online 3 Aug 2007</p><p>PMCID:PMC1959239.</p><p></p> Latencies (ms); Control: Face 380, Arm 410, Leg 500; Patient: Face 440, Arm 560, Leg not recordable. Amplitudes (μV); Control: Face 20.86, Arm 20.07, Leg 14.46; Patient: Face 8.45, Arm 5.22, Leg not recordable

Contact Heat Evoked Potential Aδ amplitudes following stimulation of the face, arm and leg of controls (white bars) and patients (black bars)

<p><b>Copyright information:</b></p><p>Taken from "Use of the novel contact heat evoked potential stimulator (CHEPS) for the assessment of small fibre neuropathy: correlations with skin flare responses and intra-epidermal nerve fibre counts"</p><p>http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2377/7/21</p><p>BMC Neurology 2007;7():21-21.</p><p>Published online 3 Aug 2007</p><p>PMCID:PMC1959239.</p><p></p> * = 0.034, ** p = 0.02, *** p = 0.0032