Visitors   Views   Downloads
"PeerJ Preprints" is a venue for early communication or feedback before peer review. Data may be preliminary.

A peer-reviewed article of this Preprint also exists.

View peer-reviewed version

Supplemental Information

Raw data

Raw data for Fig3

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.971v1/supp-3

Raw data

Raw data for Fig4

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.971v1/supp-4

Raw data

Raw data for Fig5

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.971v1/supp-5

Raw data

Raw data for Fig6

DOI: 10.7287/peerj.preprints.971v1/supp-6

Additional Information

Competing Interests

The authors declare they have no competing interests.

Author Contributions

Xiao-Cui Zhu performed the experiments.

Chen-Tao Ge performed the experiments.

Wang Pan performed the experiments.

Jia-Li Zhang performed the experiments.

Yuan-Yang Yu performed the experiments.

Cai-Yun Fu conceived and designed the experiments, analyzed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, wrote the paper, prepared figures and/or tables, reviewed drafts of the paper.

Animal Ethics

The following information was supplied relating to ethical approvals (i.e., approving body and any reference numbers):

The study has been approved by the ethic committee of animal research in Hangzhou Normal University. All procedures followed guidelines of animal research in Hangzhou Normal University (permit number: 2014-0023), and the animal pain research guidelines of International Association for the Study of Pain (IASP).


This work was supported by grants from the Zhejiang Provincial Nature Science Foundation of China (No. LY14C050003), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 31470071), the New Century 151 Talent Project of Zhejiang Province, the 521 Talent Foundation of Zhejiang Sci-Tech University, Zhejiang Provincial Top Key Discipline of Biology. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Add your feedback

Before adding feedback, consider if it can be asked as a question instead, and if so then use the Question tab. Pointing out typos is fine, but authors are encouraged to accept only substantially helpful feedback.

Some Markdown syntax is allowed: _italic_ **bold** ^superscript^ ~subscript~ %%blockquote%% [link text](link URL)
By posting this you agree to PeerJ's commenting policies