Figures & data
Figure 1. Molecular structure of resveratrol.
Figure 2. Effects of resveratrol on Scr and BUN levels in UUO rats. A, Scr. B, BUN. Lane 1 represents the data as mean ± SEM, from sham treated group; lane 2 from model group; lane 3 from enalapril group; lane 4 from high-dose resveratrol group; lane 5 from middle-dose resveratrol group and lane 6 from low-dose resveratrol group. The differences are significant as “a” depicts p values of <0.01 versus the sham group, “b” represents p values of <0.05 versus model group, “c” represents p values of <0.01 versus model group while “d” represents p values of <0.05 versus enalapril group.
Figure 3. Effect of resveratrol on weight of kidney in UUO rats. Lane 1 represents the data as mean ± SEM, from sham treated group; lane 2 from model group; lane 3 from enalapril group; lane 4 from high-dose resveratrol group; lane 5 from middle-dose resveratrol group and lane 6 from low-dose resveratrol group. The differences are significant as “a” depicts p values of <0.01 versus the sham group, “b” represents p values of <0.05 versus model group, “c” represents p values of <0.01 versus model group while “d” represents p values of <0.05 versus enalapril group.
Figure 4. Effect of resveratrol on rat renal tubular damage index. The tissue sections from different groups were stained with HE staining and observed under light microscope at 400× magnification. Panel a represents sham group; panel B represents model group; panel c represents enalapril group; panel d represents high-dose resveratrol group; panel e represents middle-dose resveratrol group and panel f represents low-dose resveratrol group.
Figure 5. Effect of resveratrol on collagen distribution area in UUO rats. The tissue sections from different groups were stained with Masson staining and observed under light microscope at 400× magnification. Panel a represents sham group; panel b represents model group; panel c represents enalapril group; panel d represents high-dose resveratrol group; panel e represents middle-dose resveratrol group and panel f represents low-dose resveratrol group.
Figure 6. Quantitation of the effect of resveratrol on rat renal tubular damage index and collagen distribution area in UUO rats. Lane 1 represents the data as mean ± SEM, from sham treated group; lane 2 from model group; lane 3 from enalapril group; lane 4 from high-dose resveratrol group; lane 5 from middle-dose resveratrol group and lane 6 from low-dose resveratrol group. The differences are significant as “a” depicts p values of <0.01 versus the sham group, “b” represents p values of <0.05 versus model group, “c” represents p values of <0.01 versus model group while “d” represents p values of <0.05 versus enalapril group.
Figure 7. Effect of resveratrol on renal tubular epithelial cell apoptosis index in UUO rats. The tissue sections from different groups were stained with TUNNEL staining and observed under light microscope at 400× magnification. Panel a represents sham group; panel b represents model group; panel c represents enalapril group; panel d represents high-dose resveratrol group; panel e represents middle-dose resveratrol group and panel f represents low-dose resveratrol group.
Figure 8. Quantitation of the effect of resveratrol on renal tubular epithelial cell apoptosis index in UUO rats. Lane 1 represents the data as mean ± SEM, from sham treated group; lane 2 from model group; lane 3 from enalapril group; lane 4 from high-dose resveratrol group; lane 5 from middle-dose resveratrol group and lane 6 from low-dose resveratrol group. The differences are significant as “a” depicts p values of <0.01 versus the sham group, “b” represents p values of <0.05 versus model group, “c” represents p values of <0.01 versus model group while “d” represents p values of <0.05 versus enalapril group.
Figure 9. Western blot analysis of eIF2α and ATF4 protein levels. Lane 1 represents the data as mean ± SEM, from sham treated group; lane 2 from model group; lane 3 from enalapril group; lane 4 from high-dose resveratrol group; lane 5 from middle-dose resveratrol group and lane 6 from low-dose resveratrol group. Top panel represents an expression by western blot from the kidney lysates isolated, from different treatment groups. Bottom panel represents β-actin protein expression and is an internal control for equal loading of protein.
Figure 10. Quantitation of the effect of resveratrol on eIF2α and ATF4 protein expression in renal tissue of UUO rats. A, eIF2α. B, ATF4. Lane 1 represents the data as mean ± SEM, from sham treated group; lane 2 from model group; lane 3 from enalapril group; lane 4 from high-dose resveratrol group; lane 5 from middle-dose resveratrol group and lane 6 from low-dose resveratrol group. The differences are significant as “a” depicts p values of <0.01 versus the sham group, “b” represents p values of <0.05 versus model group, “c” represents p values of <0.01 versus model group while “d” represents p values of <0.05 versus enalapril group.
