Skip to main content
Fig. 1 | Cell Communication and Signaling

Fig. 1

From: Sexual dimorphism in the molecular mechanisms of insulin resistance during a critical developmental window in Wistar rats

Fig. 1

Systemic insulin sensitivity and glucose tolerance. a Blood glucose, n = 30 rats per group and b plasma insulin, n = 10 rats per group. The bars represent the mean ± S.E.M. *P < 0.05, ****P < 0.0001 compared to their control group by two-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey's test; #P < 0.05, ##P < 0.005, ###P < 0.0005, ####P < 0.0001 compared between sex and fasting vs fed state by two-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey’s test; c Insulin sensitivity test (ITT), 0.2 IU/kg of body weight of intraperitoneal insulin was administered. Data expressed as mean ± S.E.M., n = 15 rats per group. **P < 0.005, ****P < 0.0001 compared to their control and in ITT area under the curve (AUC), the bars represent the mean ± S.E.M. ****P < 0.0001 compared to their control group and ####P < 0.0001 compared between sex by one-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey’s test; d IP glucose tolerance test (IPGTT), 2 g/kg of body weight of intraperitoneal glucose was administered. Data expressed as mean ± S.E.M., n = 10 rats per group. *P < 0.05, **P = 0.007, ****P < 0.0001 compared to their control and in IPGTT area under the curve (AUC), the bars represent the mean ± S.E.M. *P < 0.05 compared to their control group and compared between sex by one-way ANOVA with post hoc Tukey’s test. Created with GraphPad Prism V 9.3.1 (471)

Back to article page