Close
  Indian J Med Microbiol
 

Figure 4: Evaluation of PRMT1, DDAH1, DDAH2, eNOS, p-eNOS, and nNOS protein expression by Western blot in Sham group, NC group, EGCG-10 group and EGCG-100 group. (a) Representative Western blot analysis of eNOS and p-eNOS in corpus cavernosum among groups. β-actin was used as a loading control. (b) Representative Western blot analysis of DDAH1 and DDAH2 in corpus cavernosum among groups. β-actin was used as a loading control. (c) Representative Western blot analysis of nNOS in corpus cavernosum among groups. β-actin was used as a loading control. (d) Representative Western blot analysis of PRMT1 in corpus cavernosum among groups. β-actin was used as a loading control. Each bar depicted the mean values (± standard deviation) from n = 10 animals per group. *P < 0.05 versus NC group, **P < 0.01 versus NC group, #P < 0.05 versus Sham group, ##P < 0.01 versus Sham group

Figure 4: Evaluation of PRMT1, DDAH1, DDAH2, eNOS, p-eNOS, and nNOS protein expression by Western blot in Sham group, NC group, EGCG-10 group and EGCG-100 group. (a) Representative Western blot analysis of eNOS and p-eNOS in corpus cavernosum among groups. β-actin was used as a loading control. (b) Representative Western blot analysis of DDAH1 and DDAH2 in corpus cavernosum among groups. β-actin was used as a loading control. (c) Representative Western blot analysis of nNOS in corpus cavernosum among groups. β-actin was used as a loading control. (d) Representative Western blot analysis of PRMT1 in corpus cavernosum among groups. β-actin was used as a loading control. Each bar depicted the mean values (± standard deviation) from <i>n</i> = 10 animals per group. *<i>P</i> < 0.05 versus NC group, **<i>P</i> < 0.01 versus NC group, #<i>P</i> < 0.05 versus Sham group, ##<i>P</i> < 0.01 versus Sham group