Figures & data
Figure 1. Dose–response curves for the antinociceptive effect of A. millefolium, (A), ORG (B), and A. millefolium–ORG encapsulated in liposome (C) in the second phase of formalin test.
![Figure 1. Dose–response curves for the antinociceptive effect of A. millefolium, (A), ORG (B), and A. millefolium–ORG encapsulated in liposome (C) in the second phase of formalin test.](/cms/asset/168c330b-7fa7-4ecc-afb9-26a79ffa3080/ianb_a_1354303_f0001_c.jpg)
Figure 2. The isobologram antinociceptive synergistic interaction between A. millefolium and ORG extract encapsulated in liposome in the second phase of the formalin test.
![Figure 2. The isobologram antinociceptive synergistic interaction between A. millefolium and ORG extract encapsulated in liposome in the second phase of the formalin test.](/cms/asset/0c2894d2-1a42-4e42-aa90-13e85f219fec/ianb_a_1354303_f0002_c.jpg)
Table 1. Co-administration drug dose used.
Figure 3. The effect of naloxone (A) and L-NAME (B) on the antinociceptive effect of the A. millefolium and ORG extract encapsulated in liposome combination. Bars are the mean ± SEM for at least six animals. Significantly different (*p < .05) from the co-administration (C), by one-way analysis of variance followed by the Student–Newman–Keuls test.
![Figure 3. The effect of naloxone (A) and L-NAME (B) on the antinociceptive effect of the A. millefolium and ORG extract encapsulated in liposome combination. Bars are the mean ± SEM for at least six animals. Significantly different (*p < .05) from the co-administration (C), by one-way analysis of variance followed by the Student–Newman–Keuls test.](/cms/asset/f29b19b5-8af8-4ab8-9579-523ebcec0415/ianb_a_1354303_f0003_c.jpg)