File:Lu Nicoll 2009 FIG4.jpg: Difference between revisions
Bradley Monk (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Bradley Monk (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
(F) (F1) Bar graphs show mEPSCs amplitude (Cnt, −10.51 ± 0.37 pA; ΔGluA2, 11.08 ± 0.65 pA; p = 0.42), (F2) frequency (Cnt, 0.28 ± 0.03 Hz; ΔGluA2, 0.16 ± 0.03 Hz; ∗p < 0.001), and (F3) decay (Cnt, 11.30 ± 0.49 ms; ΔGluA2, 9.75 ± 1.14 ms; p = 0.27). n = 22 and 17 for Cnt and ΔGluA2, respectively. | (F) (F1) Bar graphs show mEPSCs amplitude (Cnt, −10.51 ± 0.37 pA; ΔGluA2, 11.08 ± 0.65 pA; p = 0.42), (F2) frequency (Cnt, 0.28 ± 0.03 Hz; ΔGluA2, 0.16 ± 0.03 Hz; ∗p < 0.001), and (F3) decay (Cnt, 11.30 ± 0.49 ms; ΔGluA2, 9.75 ± 1.14 ms; p = 0.27). n = 22 and 17 for Cnt and ΔGluA2, respectively. | ||
[[Category:Synaptic Plasticity]] [[Category:Journals]] | [[Category:Synaptic Plasticity]] [[Category:Journals]][[Category:Nicoll]] |
Latest revision as of 18:11, 20 March 2015
Lu, Shi, Nicoll • 2009 • Cell - FullText
- Figure 4.
AMPARs Adjust Rapidly to the Deletion of GluA2 (A) (A1 and A2) The time course for the changes in synaptic transmission in hippocampal slice cultures from GRIA2fl/fl mice after transfection of Cre-IRES-GFP. Ratio of RI (open circles, 3–5 days, 0.95; 6 days, 0.99; 7–8 days, 0.71; 9–10 days, 0.60; 11–12 days, 0.34; 12–14 days, 0.16; >14 days, 0.15), ratio of AMPAR EPSCs (closed circle, 3–5 days, 0.96; 6 days, 0.49; 7–8 days, 0.57; 9–10 days, 0.56; 11–12 days, 0.50; 12–14 days, 0.57; >14 days, 0.51), and ratio of NMDAR EPSCs (closed diamonds, 3–5 days, 1.08; 6 days, 1.01; 7–8 days, 1.06; 9–10 days, 1.04; 11–12 days, 0.99; 12–14 days, 1.01; >14 days, 1.10) from transfected cells to neighboring control cells, respectively. Open square shows RI from CA1 pyramidal neurons from germline GluA2 KO mice (0.13 ± 0.02, n = 5). (A2) Graph shows the percentage of the average AMPAR EPSCs (51.7% ± 5.2%; n = 86; ∗p < 0.0001), NMDAR EPSCs (97.8% ± 13.2%; n = 64; p = 0.81), and RI (15.0% ± 1.8%; n = 19; ∗p < 0.0001) from transfected cells or GluA2 KO cells (13.3% ± 2.0%; n = 5; ∗p < 0.01) to control cells. (B) (B1–B3) Scatter plots (B1) and bar graphs (B2 and B3) show amplitudes of EPSCs for single pairs (open circles) and mean ± SEM (filled circles) for GRIA2fl/fl. (Inset in B1) Sample traces are as follows: black, control; green, Cre. (B2) EPSC amplitudes show a significant reduction in the AMPAR EPSCs (Cnt, −66.2 ± 3.8 pA; Cre, −34.2 ± 2.5 pA; n = 86; ∗p < 0.0001). (B3) There was no change in the NMDAR EPSCs (GluA2, Cnt, 40.0 ± 3.7 pA; Cre, 39.1 ± 3.4 pA, n = 64; p = 0.81). The data were pooled from acute hippocampal slices (P13–P17) from animals injected at P0–P2 and from hippocampal slice cultures. (C and D) Bar graphs show average RI (C) (Cnt, 0.99 ± 0.03, n = 30; ΔGluA2, 0.15 ± 0.02, n = 19; ∗p < 0.001) and average PPR (D) (Cnt, n = 84; ΔGluA2, n = 29; p > 0.05). Left were sample traces. (E) Sample traces of mEPSCs shown at a low gain and sweep speed (traces on left; scale bar, 10 pA, 500 ms) and averaged mEPSCs at a high gain and sweep speed (traces on right). Control trace (black) has been superimposed on the trace from a Cre cell. Scale bar, 5 pA, 10 ms. mEPSCs were recorded from acute hippocampal slices (P13–P18) from animals injected at P0–P2. (F) (F1) Bar graphs show mEPSCs amplitude (Cnt, −10.51 ± 0.37 pA; ΔGluA2, 11.08 ± 0.65 pA; p = 0.42), (F2) frequency (Cnt, 0.28 ± 0.03 Hz; ΔGluA2, 0.16 ± 0.03 Hz; ∗p < 0.001), and (F3) decay (Cnt, 11.30 ± 0.49 ms; ΔGluA2, 9.75 ± 1.14 ms; p = 0.27). n = 22 and 17 for Cnt and ΔGluA2, respectively.
File history
Click on a date/time to view the file as it appeared at that time.
Date/Time | Thumbnail | Dimensions | User | Comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
current | 18:04, 20 March 2015 | Error creating thumbnail: File missing | 2,905 × 2,731 (594 KB) | Bradley Monk (talk | contribs) |
You cannot overwrite this file.
File usage
The following page uses this file: