Table 1.

Response values and statistics before and after antagonist application obtained in in vivo electrophysiological experiments

Figure(s)	Treatment	Administration mode	Pre-antagonist vs post-antagonist values	p-value
2B, 3B	Naloxone hydrochloride	Intravenous	102 ± 6% vs 138 ± 16%	<0.001
2C, 3C	Naloxone methiodide	Intravenous	100 ± 4% vs 124 ± 10%	<0.001
2D, 3D	Naloxone hydrochloride	Spinal	99 ± 3% vs 113 ± 6%	<0.001
2E, 3E	CTOP	Intravenous	102 ± 5% vs 119 ± 8%	<0.001
5B	Granisetron	Spinal	99 ± 4% vs 132 ± 15%	<0.001
5C,F	Asenapine	Spinal	99 ± 4% vs 129 ± 8%	<0.001
6A	4F 4PP	Spinal	98 ± 6% vs 140 ± 18%	<0.001
6B	SB 204741	Spinal	101 ± 4% vs 131 ± 15%	<0.001
6C	RS 102221	Spinal	102 ± 5% vs 124 ± 12%	0.002
6D	4F 4PP, SB 204741, RS 102221	Spinal	101 ± 6% vs 130 ± 10%	<0.001
9A	Fluorocitrate	Spinal	98 ± 4% vs 105 ± 14%	0.4
9C	DAAO	Spinal	100 ± 4% vs 137 ± 10%	<0.001
9D	D-AP5	Spinal	100 ± 9% vs 97 ± 6%	0.6

Values represent mean areas of C-fiber-evoked field potentials ± SEM. Data were normalized to the last five time points before antagonist application. p-values were obtained via paired t test.