Table S1．The F value and P value in multiple comparisons of figure 1CON-4week vs. CON-7weekt=2.212, df=80.0579PA20-4week vs. PA20-7weekt=0.3486, df=80.7364CMS-4week vs. CMS-7weekt=4.274, df=80.0027CMS+PA10-4week vs. CMS+PA10-7weekt=5.571, df=80.0005Figure 1BCMS+PA20-4week vs. CMS+PA20-7weekt=5.881, df=80.0004CMS+PA40-4week vs. CMS+PA40-7weekt=3.027, df=80.0164CMS+IMI-4week vs. CMS+IMI-7weekt=9.127, df=8<0.0001CON vs. CMS<0.0001CON vs. PA200.6741Figure 1CCMS vs. CMS+PA1013.590.6741(Latency )CMS vs. CMS+PA20<0.0001CMS vs. CMS+PA400.0039CMS vs. CMS+IMI0.01223CON vs. CMS0.0040CON vs. PA200.4544Figure 1CCMS vs. CMS+PA105.4880.2482(Immobility time)CMS vs. CMS+PA200.0025CMS vs. CMS+PA400.0416CMS vs. CMS+IMI0.0132CON vs. CMS0.9696CON vs. PA200.0057Figure 1DCMS vs. CMS+PA1010.080.9251CMS vs. CMS+PA200.0054CMS vs. CMS+PA400.0025CMS vs. CMS+IMI0.0007CON vs. CMS0.9843CON vs. PA200.8181Figure 1ECMS vs. CMS+PA102.2080.9814CMS vs. CMS+PA200.8457CMS vs. CMS+PA400.2422CMS vs. CMS+IMI>0.9999CON-4week vs. CON-7weekt=5.314, df=80.0007PA20-4week vs. PA20-7weekt=2.796, df=80.0233CMS-4week vs. CMS-7weekt=6.530, df=80.0002CMS+PA10-4week vs. CMS+PA10-7weekt=4.181, df=80.0031Figure 1FCMS+PA20-4week vs. CMS+PA20-7weekt=9.373, df=8<0.0001CMS+PA40-4week vs. CMS+PA40-7weekt=12.01, df=8<0.0001CMS+IMI-4week vs. CMS+IMI-7weekt=2.011, df=80.0791Table S2．The F value and P value in multiple comparisons of figure 2CON vs. CMS<0.0001Figure 2BCON vs. PA2017.05>0.9999(Number of Iba1+ cell)-DGCMS vs. CMS+PA0.0001CON vs. CMS0.0028Figure 2BCON vs. PA2010.280.9998(Number of Iba1+ cell)-CA1CMS vs. CMS+PA0.0101CON vs. CMS0.7102Figure 2BCON vs. PA204.8800.4603(Number of Iba1+ cell)-CA3CMS vs. CMS+PA0.8886CON vs. CMS57.090.9988Figure 2BCON vs. PA20118.90.4016(Area of Iba1+staining)CMS vs. CMS+PA118.90.4153CON vs. CMS52.25<0.0001Figure 2BCON vs. PA2071.060.2534(Area of soma)CMS vs. CMS+PA71.06<0.0001CON vs. CMS8.705<0.0001Figure 2BCON vs. PA2019.750.4438(Number of branches)CMS vs. CMS+PA19.75<0.0001CON vs. CMS2.3710.0286Figure 2BCON vs. PA2011.120.9809(Length of the maximum branch)CMS vs. CMS+PA11.120.0017CON vs. CMS19.55<0.0001Figure 2C0.9929(Average intersections)CON vs. PA20CMS vs. CMS+PA14.1514.15<0.0001CON vs. CMS<0.0001Figure 2CCON vs. PA2089.220.7348(Distance from soma)-55CMS vs. CMS+PA<0.0001CON vs. CMS<0.0001Figure 2CCON vs. PA2089.220.9919(Distance from soma)-65CMS vs. CMS+PA<0.0001CON vs. CMS<0.0001Figure 2CCON vs. PA2089.220.9685(Distance from soma)-75CMS vs. CMS+PA<0.0001CON vs. CMS<0.0001Figure 2CCON vs. PA2089.220.8945(Distance from soma)-85CMS vs. CMS+PA<0.0001CON vs. CMS<0.0001Figure 2CCON vs. PA2089.220.9337(Distance from soma)-95CMS vs. CMS+PA<0.0001CON vs. CMS<0.0001Figure 2CCON vs. PA2089.220.9638(Distance from soma)-105CMS vs. CMS+PA<0.0001Figure 2DCON vs. PA2031.850.0364(IL-18)CMS vs. CMS+PA<0.0001CON vs. CMS0.0001Figure 2DCON vs. PA2090.9102472(IL-6)CMS vs. CMS+PA<0.0001CON vs. CMS0.0050Figure 2DCON vs. PA2028.330.5974(TNF-α)CMS vs. CMS+PA0.0024CON vs. CMS0.0312Figure 2ECON vs. PA209.7110.9690(IL-6 /β-actin)CMS vs. CMS+PA0.0456CON vs. CMS0.0051Figure 2ECON vs. PA2015.680.8972(TNF-α/β-actin)CMS vs. CMS+PA0.0007Table S3．The F value and P value in multiple comparisons of figure 3CON vs. CMS0.0403Figure 3ACON vs. PA208.366>0.9999(NLRP3 /GADPH)CMS vs. CMS+PA0.0138CON vs. CMS47.54<0.0001Figure 3ACON vs. PA2019.720.7450(Area of NLRP3+ staining)CMS vs. CMS+PA19.720.0004CON vs. CMS11.260.0040Figure 3ACON vs. PA2011.670.9544(NLRP3+ - Iba1+ cell)CMS vs. CMS+PA11.670.0023CON vs. CMS0.0200Figure 3BCON vs. PA2011.300.9796(ASC /GADPH)CMS vs. CMS+PA0.0349CON vs. CMS55.55<0.0001Figure 3BCON vs. PA2052.720.8623(Area of ASC+ staining)CMS vs. CMS+PA52.72<0.0001CON vs. CMS25.540.0002Figure 3BCON vs. PA206.8100.9985(ASC+ - Iba1+ cell)CMS vs. CMS+PA6.8100.0069CON vs. CMS2.3930.0381Figure 3CCON vs. PA200.59940.5399(Pro-casp1 /GADPH)CMS vs. CMS+PA0.59940.1061CON vs. CMS3.0800.1326Figure 3C>0.9999(Pro-IL-1β /GADPH)CON vs. PA20CMS vs. CMS+PA2.1092.1090.1901CON vs. CMS10.440.0020Figure 3CCON vs. PA206.1840.9727(Cleaved-casp1 /GADPH)CMS vs. CMS+PA6.1840.0057CON vs. CMS0.34230.0419Figure 3DCON vs. PA206.7870.8966(Cleaved-IL-1β/GADPH)CMS vs. CMS+PA6.7870.0024Table S4．The F value and P value in multiple comparisons of figure 4PA0 vs. PA50.6184PA0 vs. PA100.8160PA0 vs. PA200.9785Figure 4APA0 vs. PA403.1780.9267PA0 vs. PA80>0.9999PA0 vs. PA1000.9155PA0 vs. PA2000.9861PBS vs. LPS-ATP0.0015LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA5>0.9999Figure 4BLPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA1012.140.3445(NLRP3)LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA200.1504LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA400.0121LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA800.9835PBS vs. LPS-ATP0.0045LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA50.4527Figure 4BLPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA104.7430.0196(IL-18)LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA200.7669LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA400.0207LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA800.3797PBS vs. LPS-ATP0.0129LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA50.0144Figure 4BLPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA1032.390.0304(TNF-α)LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA200.0304LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA400.0304LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA800.0304PBS vs. LPS-ATP0.0026LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA50.0266Figure 4BLPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA1017.090.0451(IL-1β)LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA200.0180LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA400.0036LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA800.1308PBS vs. LPS-ATP4.5820.0107Figure 4CPBS vs. PBS-PA14.750.8910LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA14.750.0007PBS vs. LPS-ATP93.72<0.0001Figure 4DPBS vs. PBS-PA5.8770.8627LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA5.8770.0023PBS vs. LPS-ATP15.210.0014Figure 4EPBS vs. PBS-PA3.2840.9795LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA3.2840.0365PBS vs. LPS-ATP1.082>0.9999Figure 4F(Pro-IL-1β/ β-actin)PBS vs. PBS-PA1.137>0.9999LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA1.1370.4774PBS vs. LPS-ATP2.7580.2074Figure 4EPBS vs. PBS-PA0.37050.9719Pro-casp1/ β-actinLPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA0.37050.5766PBS vs. LPS-ATP5.7680.2888Figure 4EPBS vs. PBS-PA5.6660.9884(NLRP3/ β-actin)LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA5.6660.298PBS vs. LPS-ATP1.8540.0359Figure 4EPBS vs. PBS-PA7.699>0.9999(Cleaved-IL-1β/ β-actin)LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA7.6990.0040PBS vs. LPS-ATP2.1760.0199Figure 4FPBS vs. PBS-PA2.0150.6413(Cleaved-casp1 / β-actin)LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA2.0150.0217PBS vs. LPS-ATP2.5100.0069Figure 4FPBS vs. PBS-PA7.9540.9312(ASC/ β-actin)LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA7.9540.0009Table S5．The F value and P value in multiple comparisons of figure 5CON vs. CMS4.6930.0029Figure 5ACON vs. PA205.3320.6882(Number of BrdU+cell per DG)CMS vs. CMS+PA5.3320.0024CON vs. CMS20.15<0.0001Figure 5ACON vs. PA2015.920.4708(Number of BrdU+-DCX+cell per DG)CMS vs. CMS+PA15.92<0.0001CON vs. CMS18.040.0011Figure 5ACON vs. PA204.6310.9938(Brdu+-DCX+/ BrdU+cell)CMS vs. CMS+PA4.6310.0211CON vs. CMS4.0890.0214Figure 5BCON vs. PA206.1900.996(DCX+ cell per DG)CMS vs. CMS+PA6.1900.0110CON vs. CMS3.4060.0199Figure 5BCON vs. PA2016.780.8189(GCL volume)CMS vs. CMS+PA16.780.0008Table S6．The F value and P value in multiple comparisons of figure 6PA0 vs. PA50.9997PA0 vs. PA100.9945Figure 6APA0 vs. PA200.46160.9997(MAP2+ cells)PA0 vs. PA400.7745PA0 vs. PA800.9996PA0 vs. PA5>0.9999Figure 6APA0 vs. PA100.9531(GFAP+ cells)PA0 vs. PA200.19580.9986PA0 vs. PA400.9997PA0 vs. PA800.9835PBS vs. LPS-ATP4.5090.0135Figure 6APBS vs. PBS-PA15.290.8783(MAP2+ cells)LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA15.290.0010PBS vs. LPS-ATP0.84970.5269Figure 6APBS vs. PBS-PA1.143>0.9999(GFAP+ cells)LPS-ATP vs. LPS-ATP-PA1.1430.4674Table S7．The F value and P value in multiple comparisons of figure S1CON vs. CMS0.9988CON vs. PA200.4016Figure S1ACMS vs. CMS+PA102.304>0.9999CMS vs. CMS+PA200.4153CMS vs. CMS+PA400.9999CMS vs. CMS+IMI>0.9999CON vs. CMS0.9667CON vs. PA200.4366Figure S1ACMS vs. CMS+PA106.0380.7595CMS vs. CMS+PA200.0298CMS vs. CMS+PA400.0733CMS vs. CMS+IMI0.9450CON vs. CMS0.9983CON vs. PA20<0.0001Figure S1BCMS vs. CMS+PA1019.87<0.0001CMS vs. CMS+PA20<0.0001CMS vs. CMS+PA40<0.0001CMS vs. CMS+IMI>0.9999微软用户呵 呵22022-04-12T10:54:00Z2022-04-12T10:54:00Z01013457671Microsoft Office Word06317false微软中国false8999falsefalse16.0000