GFAP Antibody - #BF0345

Fig. 4. Effects of compounds on GFAP and Iba-1 expression in the LPS-induced astrocytes (C6, treated with 10 mg/mL of LPS) and microglia (BV2, treated with 1 mg/mL of LPS). A. Representative fluorescence microscopy images of GFAP immunostaining (Magnification  20). B. Representative fluorescence microscopy images of Iba-1 immunostaining (Magnification  40). C. Histograms show relative changes of GFAP expressed as mean ± SD of the three independent experiments (n ¼ 3). Ctrl. ¼ Control, LPS ¼ Lipopolysaccharide (10 mg/mL); 3, 13, 16 ¼ treatments by compounds 3, 13, 16 (20 mM) along with LPS (10 mg/mL). D. Histograms show relative changes of Iba-1 expressed as mean ± SD of the three independent experiments (n ¼ 3). All the data were analyzed using Image Pro Plus and expressed as a percent of LPS group values (fluorescence intensity). (#) Significant difference (##p < 0.01, ###p < 0.001) vs. control and (*) significant difference (*p < 0.05 and **p < 0.01) vs. LPS.

Figure 4 LiESWT increased neuronal regeneration, synaptic transmission, and receptor response. The expressions of neuronal endogenous markers (NF, NeuN, and GFAP) and muscarinic receptor (M2 and M3), and purinergic receptor (P2X7) markers were assessed by immunostaining (A–H) and Western blots (I,J). Nuclear DNA was labeled with DAPI (blue). (A–D) The M2 immunostaining was markedly expressed in the UL and SL of the (A) sham group. On the contrary, there was less M2 staining expression in the thinner and defective urothelial mucosa in the UL (yellow arrows) of the (B) OVX group, but the immunostainings in the (C) OVX + SW4 group and the (D) OVX + SW8 group were enhanced. (E–H) Double-labeled analysis of M2 (red, upper panels) and NF (green, lower panels) was distributed in the ML of the (E) sham group. However, the double staining of the (G) OVX + SW4 group and the (H) OVX + SW8 group were widely expressed compared with the (F) OVX group. (I,J) Quantifications of the percentage of neurogenesis-related markers, muscarinic receptors, and purinergic receptors were evaluated by Western blotting. The expressions obviously decreased in the OVX group compared with the sham group. However, the expressions significantly increased in the OVX + SW4 group and OVX + SW8 group compared with the OVX group. Therefore, the LiESWT promoted bladder synaptic transmission, receptor response, and neurogenesis to ameliorate the bladder detrusor contractile response. Nuclear DNA was labeled with DAPI (blue). LiESWT, low-intensity extracorporeal shock wave therapy; OVX + SW4, OHD status for 12 months, followed by once weekly LiESWT for 4 weeks; OVX + SW8, OHD status for 12 months, followed by twice weekly LiESWT for 4 weeks; DAPI, 4′,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole; NF, neurofilament; NeuN, neuronal nuclear antigen and neuron; GFAP, glial fibrillary acidic protein; GAPDH, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase; UL, urothelial layer; SL, suburothelial layer. Data are expressed as the means ± SD for n = 8. * p < 0.05 and ** p < 0.01 versus the sham group; ## p < 0.01 versus the OVX group; †† p < 0.01 versus the OVX + SW4 group.

Figure 3. |Co‑localization of Px1 and GFAP in IP model rats. Px1 (green) and GFAP (red)expression was analyzed using an immunofluorescence assay.Magnification, x200; scale bar, 10 µm. C,control group; IP, incision pain; CBX, carbenoxolone; 10panx, pannexin‑1 mimetic inhibitory peptide; Px1, pannexin 1;GFAP, glial fibrillary acidic protein

Figure 3. |Co‑localization of Px1 and GFAP in IP model rats. Px1 (green) and GFAP (red) expression was analyzed using an immunofluorescence assay. Magnification, x200; scale bar, 10 µm. C, control group; IP, incision pain; CBX, carbenoxolone; 10panx, pannexin‑1 mimetic inhibitory peptide; Px1, pannexin 1;GFAP, glial fibrillary acidic protein.

Figure 2 Emodin reduces spinal cord inflammatory response by inhibiting spinal cord astrocyte activation. Representative (A) hematoxylin and eosin-stained images and (B) inflammation score analysis of the spinal dorsal horn in each group. Scale bar, 20 µm. Representative (C) immunofluorescence staining images of IL-1β and GFAP and (E) quantitative fluorescence intensity analysis (overall magnification, x400; scale bar, 20 µm). (D) Western blot analysis and (F) quantification of the relative grey value of IL-1β and GFAP. Data are presented as the mean ± SD (n=5). *P

Figure 1 Effects of AQP4 on GFAP and p-tau aggregation. (a and b) Histology, qPCR, and Western blot assays verify adenovirus efficiency; (c and d) GFAP and AQP4 and p-tau aggregation (pSer202/pThr205, p-tau) and neuronal marker (NeuN) co-expression were evaluated by Immunofluorescence double staining. *p < 0.05 vs control. All experiments were repeated 3 times. Each group has 7 mice.