(Downloading may take up to 30 seconds.
If the slide opens in your browser, select File -> Save As to save it.)
Click on image to view larger version.

Fig. 3. Transepithelial potential (TEP) of the upper, secretory segment of the
Malpighian tubules. (A) Representative recording showing the effects of 1
µmol l–1 ZooneDH (arrow). Three distinct phases of the
response are numbered on the trace. The dotted line indicates a potential of 0
mV, when both microelectrodes were placed in the bathing droplet. (B) The mean
± s.e.m. (N=5) TEP prior to the addition of ZooneDH (Rest) and
during the three phases of the response. (C) Representative recording showing
the effects of 0.1 µmol l–1 RhoprDH31 (solid
arrow) and 1 µmol l–1 5HT (dashed arrow). The three phases
of the TEP response to 5HT are numbered. (D) The mean ± s.e.m.
(N=5) TEP prior to the addition of RhoprDH31 (Rest), 10
min after the addition of RhoprDH31 (DH31), and during
the three phases of the 5HT response. Asterisks denote a significant
difference from the resting TEP (ANOVA, followed by Tukey–Kramer).