“…Bar histograms show means ± SEM of 10 (b), 3-5 (c), 4-5 (d), 4-5 (e), 5-8 (f), 10 (g) mice per group. Two-way ANOVA: (b) sham vs CCI, F(1,36)=16.04; p=0.0003; ipsi vs contra, F(1,36)=7.304; p=0.0104; interaction F(1,36)=5.062, p=0.0307; (c) sham vs CCI, F(1,11)=0.5569; p=0.4712; vehicle vs VU0360172, F(1,11)=5.741, p=0.0355; interaction (F1,11)=0.8168, p=0.3855; (d) sham vs CCI, F(1,15)=1.075; p=0.3163; vehicle vs VU0360172, F(1,15)=6.452, p=0.0226; interaction (F1,15)=0.7034, p=0.4148; (e) sham vs CCI, F(1,13)=3.951; p=0.0683; vehicle vs VU0360172, F(1,13)=11.21, p=0.0052; interaction (F1,13)=0.1553, p=0.6999; (f) sham vs CCI, F(1,22)=0.01997, p=0.8889; vehicle vs VU0360172, F(1,22)=8.888, p=0.0069; interaction (F1,22)=6.099, p=0.0218; (g) sham vs CCI, F(1,36)=0.4861, p=0.4902; vehicle vs VU0360172, F(1,36)=4.557, p=0.0397; interaction (F1,36)=2.313, p=0.1370. *p<0.05, **p<0.01; ***p<0.001, Bonferroni’s multiple comparison post hoc test.…”