G2C::Genetics
CYFIP1 knock-out mouse
S.G.N. Grant and the G2C Consortium
Corresponding email: Seth.Grant@ed.ac.uk
G2CMine Data Warehouse
| Cyfip1 @ G2CMine |
Genetic and Genomic Information
| Gene symbol | Cyfip1 |
| MGI ID | MGI:1338801 |
| G2Cdb mouse | G00000324 |
| Ensembl mouse | ENSMUSG00000030447 |
| G2Cdb human | G00001573 |
| Ensembl human | ENSG00000068793 |
G2CMine Data Warehouse
G2CMine integrates the scientific findings of the Genes to Cognition Programme that utilised neuroproteomics, psychiatric genetics, high-throughput mouse gene targeting combined with behavioural and electrophysiological phenotyping and informatics in order to develop a general strategy for understanding cognition at the molecular, cellular and systems neuroscience levels.
G2CMine provides comprehensive Gene Ontology, Mammalian Phenotype Ontology, Human Phenotype Ontology, UniProt, genetic and protein interactions, and regional mouse brain expression results, together with the phenotyping results of the G2C Programme.
Mutation
A mouse embryonic stem (ES) cell line (XG769, strain 129/Ola) with an insertional mutation in Cyfip1 was obtained from BayGenomics (baygenomics.ucsf.edu/). The insertional mutation in XG769, by the gene-trapping vector, pGT1lxf, that was designed to create an in-frame fusion between the 5' exons of the trapped gene and a reporter, β-geo (a fusion of β-galactosidase and neomycin phosphotransferase II), occurred in intron 12-13. Thus, the gene-trapped locus is predicted to yield a fusion transcript containing exons 1-12 of Cyfip1 and β-geo.
The ES cells were injected into C57BL/6 blastocysts to create chimeric mice, which were bred with 129S5 mice to generate heterozygous (+/-) Cyfip1 mutant mice. Those F1 heterozygous mice had been backcrossed with 129S5 mice for 1-2 times before being used for intercrossing.
Genotyping
Genomic DNA was isolated from ES cells or mouse tissues by Wizard SV 96 Genomic DNA purification system (Promega Cat A2371). Genotyping PCR consisted of a 1.2kb product amplified from the wild-type (wt) allele using a forward primer X and a reverse primer Y as above. A 1kb product was amplified from the targeted allele using primer X with reverse primer Z (5'- GGTTACGTTGGTGTAGATGG -3'), within the β-geo cassette. After enzymatic amplification for 35 cycles (45 seconds at 94 °C, 45 seconds at 55 °C, and 1 minute at 72 °C), the PCR products were size-fractionated on a 2% agarose gel in 1x Tris borate-EDTA buffer.
Primers used for genotyping (X,Y & Z). PCR genotyping of gene trap CYFIP1 mice using a common forward primer, X, and reverse primers Y and Z to amplify the wt and mutant alleles respectively.
Expression
Total RNA (100μg) was isolated from ES cells with RNeasy Mini kit (Qiagen, Cat 74104). RT-PCR was performed by generating first strand cDNA using Oligo(dT)12-18 primer (Invitrogen, Cat 18418-012) and superscript II reverse transcriptase (Invitrogen, Cat 18064-071). RT-PCR to detect a loss of Cyfip1 RNA consisted of a 195bp product amplified using a forward primer X (5'- GAATACCCAGAATTCTGCTC -3') upstream of the insertion site and reverse primer Y (5'- CAGTGGTGTAGTTGTAGCGTG -3') located downstream of the insertion site. After enzymatic amplification for 35 cycles (45 seconds at 94 °C, 1 minute at 55 °C, and 1 minute at 72 °C), the PCR products were size-fractionated on a 2% agarose gel in 1x Tris borate-EDTA buffer.
Primers used for RT-PCR (X and Y): RT-PCR to detect loss of RNA - forward primer, X (in exon 12) and reverse primer Y (in exon 13). Amplification is weaker in heterozygous mice where the gene trap cassette has been inserted
Breeding
No CYFIP1-/- mice were produced from CYFIP1+/- intercrosses. Male and female CYFIP1+/- mice developed normally to adulthood, were fertile, exhibited normal body size and no gross abnormalities. Genotypes of 3-week-old pups from CYFIP1+/- intercrosses identified 8 wt and 18 CYFIP1+/- progeny (Χ2 p= 0.0125). Backcrosses onto the 129S5/SvEvBrd background were used to maintain the colony and to generate heterozygous and wildtype mice to study.
Overview
Mutant mice showed little overall behavioural difference from wildtypes, with three of 16 behaviour variables significantly impacted in these mutant mice. In the elevated plus maze task, one behavioural variable, EPM total distance, was significantly increased in mutants. In the open field/novel object exploration task, one behavioural variable, OF NOE total distance, was significantly increased in mutants. In the rotarod task, one behavioural variable, RR memory, was significantly decreased in mutants. Fear learning, contextual memory and cued memory tasks were unaffected. Definitions of variables may be found below.
Variables shown are: EPM total distance, Total distance (cm) travelled in any arm or central zone of the EPM. EPM max speed, Maximum speed (cm/s) travelled in any arm or central zone of the EPM. EPM % time in open, Percentage of time in the open or closed arms of the EPM spent in open arms. EPM time in centre, Total time (s) spent in the central zone of the EPM. EPM max speed, open vs closed, Difference between the maximum speed (cm/s) observed in the open arms and the closed arms of the EPM. OF, NOE total distance, Total distance travelled (log₁₀ cm) during initial exposure to the open field and in presence of the novel object. NOE vs OF distance travelled, Difference in distance travelled (cm) in presence of the novel object and during initial exposure to open field. RR naive fall time, Fall time on accelerating rotarod (log₁₀ s), naive performance in session 1. RR learning, Learning on rotarod, measured as increase in fall time per trial (s/trial) in session 1. RR memory, Memory on rotarod, measured as excess fall time at middle of session 2 relative to middle of session 1. Fear learning, trial effect, Fear learning, measured as extra % time freezing before third trial compared to % time freezing before first trial. Fear learning, tone effect, Fear learning, measured as increase in % time freezing due to third tone compared to increase in % time freezing due to first tone. Contextual memory, mean, Contextual memory, measured as difference in % time freezing during first 120 s re-exposure to the box compared to first 120 s in the box on previous day. Contextual memory, change, Contextual memory, measured as increase in % time spent freezing from first time bin of 30 s to fourth bin of 30 s during 120 s re-exposure to the box. Cued memory, mean, Cued memory, measured as increase in % time spent freezing during 120 s of tone re-exposure compared to increase in % time spent freezing during initial tone on previous day. Cued memory, change, Cued memory, measured as increase in % time spent freezing from first time bin of 30 s to fourth bin of 30 s during 120 s re-exposure to the tone.
| Variable | Units | Wildtype M (n=9) | Wildtype F (n=8) | Mutant M (n=10) | Mutant F (n=8) | P(sex×mutation) | P(mutation) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EPM total distance | cm | 670 (26) | 762 (53) | 833 (63) | 788 (31) | 0.16 | 0.044 * |
| EPM max speed | cm/s | 17.5 (1.3) | 19.2 (1.4) | 17.5 (0.6) | 17.2 (0.7) | 0.35 | 0.4 |
| EPM % time in open | % | 19.3 (5.3) | 10.8 (6.6) | 25 (8.1) | 17 (4.5) | 0.96 | 0.37 |
| EPM time in centre | s | 161 (12) | 113 (18) | 129 (10) | 109 (20) | 0.35 | 0.2 |
| EPM max speed, open vs closed | cm/s | -7.7 (1.4) | -10.9 (2.4) | -7.6 (1.1) | -6 (1.3) | 0.13 | 0.14 |
| OF, NOE total distance | log10 cm | 2.88 (0.04) | 3.03 (0.08) | 3.15 (0.09) | 3.16 (0.12) | 0.41 | 0.022 * |
| NOE vs OF distance travelled | cm | -101 (44) | 246 (220) | -118 (245) | 260 (207) | 0.94 | 0.99 |
| RR naive fall time | log10 s | 1.15 (0.08) | 1.01 (0.18) | 1.15 (0.04) | 1.23 (0.05) | 0.29 | 0.29 |
| RR learning | s/trial | 0 (0.7) | 1.9 (1.6) | 0.4 (0.6) | 1.1 (1) | 0.54 | 0.88 |
| RR memory | s | 19.7 (11) | 8.8 (6.2) | 2.6 (2.4) | -3 (2) | 0.7 | 0.032 * |
| Fear learning, trial effect | % freezing | 50.7 (7.6) | 54.4 (10.7) | 47.6 (6) | 54.5 (9.7) | 0.85 | 0.85 |
| Fear learning, tone effect | % freezing | -7.6 (5) | 7.1 (5.8) | -3.4 (6.6) | 8.4 (3.8) | 0.79 | 0.61 |
| Contextual memory, mean | % freezing | 53.8 (5.5) | 51.6 (9.5) | 42.4 (6) | 50.8 (6.5) | 0.45 | 0.35 |
| Contextual memory, change | % freezing | 29.8 (7) | 38.7 (9.8) | 40.5 (9.2) | 55.7 (3.8) | 0.7 | 0.1 |
| Cued memory, mean | % freezing | -13.3 (7) | 3.7 (6.9) | -12.6 (5.5) | 3.3 (8.9) | 0.94 | 0.97 |
| Cued memory, change | % freezing | 4.4 (6.8) | 7.3 (4.6) | 8 (5.6) | -0.3 (5.7) | 0.35 | 0.8 |
Elevated Plus Maze
Variables shown are: EPM total distance, Total distance (cm) travelled in any arm or central zone of the EPM. EPM max speed, Maximum speed (cm/s) travelled in any arm or central zone of the EPM. EPM % time in open, Percentage of time in the open or closed arms of the EPM spent in open arms. EPM time in centre, Total time (s) spent in the central zone of the EPM. EPM max speed, open vs closed, Difference between the maximum speed (cm/s) observed in the open arms and the closed arms of the EPM.
| Variable | Units | Wildtype M (n=9) | Wildtype F (n=8) | Mutant M (n=10) | Mutant F (n=8) | P(sex×mutation) | P(mutation) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EPM total distance | cm | 670 (26) | 762 (53) | 833 (63) | 788 (31) | 0.16 | 0.044 * |
| EPM max speed | cm/s | 17.5 (1.3) | 19.2 (1.4) | 17.5 (0.6) | 17.2 (0.7) | 0.35 | 0.4 |
| EPM % time in open | % | 19.3 (5.3) | 10.8 (6.6) | 25 (8.1) | 17 (4.5) | 0.96 | 0.37 |
| EPM time in centre | s | 161 (12) | 113 (18) | 129 (10) | 109 (20) | 0.35 | 0.2 |
| EPM max speed, open vs closed | cm/s | -7.7 (1.4) | -10.9 (2.4) | -7.6 (1.1) | -6 (1.3) | 0.13 | 0.14 |
Open Field/Novel Object
Variables shown are: OF, NOE total distance, Total distance travelled (log₁₀ cm) during initial exposure to the open field and in presence of the novel object. NOE vs OF distance travelled, Difference in distance travelled (cm) in presence of the novel object and during initial exposure to open field.
| Variable | Units | Wildtype M (n=9) | Wildtype F (n=8) | Mutant M (n=10) | Mutant F (n=8) | P(sex×mutation) | P(mutation) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| OF, NOE total distance | log10 cm | 2.88 (0.04) | 3.03 (0.08) | 3.15 (0.09) | 3.16 (0.12) | 0.41 | 0.022 * |
| NOE vs OF distance travelled | cm | -101 (44) | 246 (220) | -118 (245) | 260 (207) | 0.94 | 0.99 |
Rotarod
Variables shown are: RR naive fall time, Fall time on accelerating rotarod (log₁₀ s), naive performance in session 1. RR learning, Learning on rotarod, measured as increase in fall time per trial (s/trial) in session 1. RR memory, Memory on rotarod, measured as excess fall time at middle of session 2 relative to middle of session 1.
| Variable | Units | Wildtype M (n=9) | Wildtype F (n=8) | Mutant M (n=10) | Mutant F (n=8) | P(sex×mutation) | P(mutation) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RR naive fall time | log10 s | 1.15 (0.08) | 1.01 (0.18) | 1.15 (0.04) | 1.23 (0.05) | 0.29 | 0.29 |
| RR learning | s/trial | 0 (0.7) | 1.9 (1.6) | 0.4 (0.6) | 1.1 (1) | 0.54 | 0.88 |
| RR memory | s | 19.7 (11) | 8.8 (6.2) | 2.6 (2.4) | -3 (2) | 0.7 | 0.032 * |
Fear Conditioning
Variables shown are: Fear learning, trial effect, Fear learning, measured as extra % time freezing before third trial compared to % time freezing before first trial. Fear learning, tone effect, Fear learning, measured as increase in % time freezing due to third tone compared to increase in % time freezing due to first tone. Contextual memory, mean, Contextual memory, measured as difference in % time freezing during first 120 s re-exposure to the box compared to first 120 s in the box on previous day. Contextual memory, change, Contextual memory, measured as increase in % time spent freezing from first time bin of 30 s to fourth bin of 30 s during 120 s re-exposure to the box. Cued memory, mean, Cued memory, measured as increase in % time spent freezing during 120 s of tone re-exposure compared to increase in % time spent freezing during initial tone on previous day. Cued memory, change, Cued memory, measured as increase in % time spent freezing from first time bin of 30 s to fourth bin of 30 s during 120 s re-exposure to the tone.
| Variable | Units | Wildtype M (n=9) | Wildtype F (n=8) | Mutant M (n=10) | Mutant F (n=8) | P(sex×mutation) | P(mutation) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fear learning, trial effect | % freezing | 50.7 (7.6) | 54.4 (10.7) | 47.6 (6) | 54.5 (9.7) | 0.85 | 0.85 |
| Fear learning, tone effect | % freezing | -7.6 (5) | 7.1 (5.8) | -3.4 (6.6) | 8.4 (3.8) | 0.79 | 0.61 |
| Contextual memory, mean | % freezing | 53.8 (5.5) | 51.6 (9.5) | 42.4 (6) | 50.8 (6.5) | 0.45 | 0.35 |
| Contextual memory, change | % freezing | 29.8 (7) | 38.7 (9.8) | 40.5 (9.2) | 55.7 (3.8) | 0.7 | 0.1 |
| Cued memory, mean | % freezing | -13.3 (7) | 3.7 (6.9) | -12.6 (5.5) | 3.3 (8.9) | 0.94 | 0.97 |
| Cued memory, change | % freezing | 4.4 (6.8) | 7.3 (4.6) | 8 (5.6) | -0.3 (5.7) | 0.35 | 0.8 |
- Overview
- Basal Synaptic Transmission
- Paired Pulse Facilitation
- Theta Burst Stimulation
- Long Term Potentiation
Overview
Mutant slices showed medium overall electrophysiological difference from wildtype slices, with two of nine variables significantly impacted in these mutant slices. In the theta burst stimulation experiment, two electrophysiological variables of five were significantly impacted in mutants. Basal synaptic transmission, paired pulse facilitation and long term potentiation experiments were unaffected. Note that in the theta burst analysis, the tenth burst is analysed as representative of individual burst amplitude. Definitions of variables may be found below.
Variables shown are: Max fEPSP amplitude, Maximum field excitatory postsynaptic potential (fEPSP) amplitude. PPF at 50ms, ampl ratio, Paired pulse facilitation (PPF), pulses separated by 50ms, amplitude ratio. Burst 1, PPF at 10ms, ampl ratio, Paired pulse facilitation (PPF), pulses separated by 10ms, amplitude ratio, observed during first two pulses of the first 100Hz burst during theta-burst stimulation. Burst 1, EPSP3 depr, ampl ratio, Depression observed in third fEPSP relative to the second fEPSP of the first 100Hz burst, amplitude ratio. Burst 1, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in first burst. Burst 2, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in second burst. Burst 3, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in third burst. Burst 4, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in fourth burst. Burst 5, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in fifth burst. Burst 6, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in sixth burst. Burst 7, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in seventh burst. Burst 8, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in eighth burst. Burst 9, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in ninth burst. Burst 10, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in tenth burst. Burst 2-4 ave amplitude vs Burst 1, Facilitation observed in average amplitude of bursts 2-4, relative to average amplitude of burst 1. Burst 8-10 ave amplitude vs Burst 2-4, Depression observed in average amplitude of bursts 8-10, relative to average amplitude of bursts 2-4. LTP vs PTP, amplitude ratio, Reduction in potentiation from immediately after theta-burst stimulation to one hour later, fEPSP amplitude ratio. LTP based on amplitude, Long term potentiation, ratio of amplitudes of fEPSPs in test pathway and control pathway.
| Variable | Units | Wildtype slices (animals) | Wildtype mean (SEM) | Mutant slices (animals) | Mutant mean (SEM) | P(animals) | P(mutation) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Max fEPSP amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 3160 (150) | 18 (5) | 3160 (150) | 0.4 | 0.98 |
| PPF at 50ms, ampl ratio | % | 17 (5) | 171.1 (3.8) | 18 (5) | 175.1 (4.9) | 0.49 | 0.54 |
| Burst 1, PPF at 10ms, ampl ratio | % | 17 (5) | 197.8 (6.4) | 17 (5) | 181.1 (7.2) | 0.99 | 0.0086 ** |
| Burst 1, EPSP3 depr, ampl ratio | % | 17 (5) | 57.2 (1.8) | 17 (5) | 66.3 (2.6) | 0.95 | 0.0023 ** |
| Burst 1, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 1200 (38) | 17 (5) | 1301 (42) | 0.53 | 0.1 |
| Burst 2, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 1831 (82) | 17 (5) | 2091 (103) | 0.022 * | 0.2 |
| Burst 3, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 2088 (95) | 17 (5) | 2326 (126) | 0.034 * | 0.3 |
| Burst 4, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 2170 (94) | 17 (5) | 2469 (136) | 0.023 * | 0.24 |
| Burst 5, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 2157 (86) | 17 (5) | 2468 (134) | 0.017 * | 0.21 |
| Burst 6, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 2096 (81) | 17 (5) | 2388 (124) | 0.015 * | 0.21 |
| Burst 7, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 2031 (79) | 17 (5) | 2318 (118) | 0.015 * | 0.2 |
| Burst 8, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 1957 (75) | 17 (5) | 2239 (114) | 0.015 * | 0.19 |
| Burst 9, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 1897 (73) | 17 (5) | 2169 (107) | 0.017 * | 0.18 |
| Burst 10, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 1854 (73) | 17 (5) | 2118 (103) | 0.017 * | 0.18 |
| Burst 2-4 ave amplitude vs Burst 1 | % | 17 (5) | 168.6 (4.4) | 17 (5) | 175.8 (6.7) | 0.0095 ** | 0.56 |
| Burst 8-10 ave amplitude vs Burst 2-4 | % | 17 (5) | 94.1 (1.5) | 17 (5) | 95 (1) | 0.3 | 0.65 |
| LTP vs PTP, amplitude ratio | % | 17 (5) | 78.6 (1) | 17 (5) | 76.4 (1.1) | 0.28 | 0.19 |
| LTP based on amplitude | % | 17 (5) | 178.8 (5.5) | 17 (5) | 172.8 (6.9) | 0.76 | 0.43 |
Basal Synaptic Transmission
Variables shown are: Max fEPSP amplitude, Maximum field excitatory postsynaptic potential (fEPSP) amplitude.
| Variable | Units | Wildtype slices (animals) | Wildtype mean (SEM) | Mutant slices (animals) | Mutant mean (SEM) | P(animals) | P(mutation) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Max fEPSP amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 3160 (150) | 18 (5) | 3160 (150) | 0.4 | 0.98 |
Paired Pulse Facilitation
Variables shown are: PPF at 50ms, ampl ratio, Paired pulse facilitation (PPF), pulses separated by 50ms, amplitude ratio.
| Variable | Units | Wildtype slices (animals) | Wildtype mean (SEM) | Mutant slices (animals) | Mutant mean (SEM) | P(animals) | P(mutation) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PPF at 50ms, ampl ratio | % | 17 (5) | 171.1 (3.8) | 18 (5) | 175.1 (4.9) | 0.49 | 0.54 |
Theta Burst Stimulation
Variables shown are: Burst 1, PPF at 10ms, ampl ratio, Paired pulse facilitation (PPF), pulses separated by 10ms, amplitude ratio, observed during first two pulses of the first 100Hz burst during theta-burst stimulation. Burst 1, EPSP3 depr, ampl ratio, Depression observed in third fEPSP relative to the second fEPSP of the first 100Hz burst, amplitude ratio. Burst 1, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in first burst. Burst 2, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in second burst. Burst 3, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in third burst. Burst 4, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in fourth burst. Burst 5, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in fifth burst. Burst 6, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in sixth burst. Burst 7, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in seventh burst. Burst 8, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in eighth burst. Burst 9, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in ninth burst. Burst 10, ave amplitude, Average amplitude of four fEPSPs in tenth burst. Burst 2-4 ave amplitude vs Burst 1, Facilitation observed in average amplitude of bursts 2-4, relative to average amplitude of burst 1. Burst 8-10 ave amplitude vs Burst 2-4, Depression observed in average amplitude of bursts 8-10, relative to average amplitude of bursts 2-4.
| Variable | Units | Wildtype slices (animals) | Wildtype mean (SEM) | Mutant slices (animals) | Mutant mean (SEM) | P(animals) | P(mutation) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Burst 1, PPF at 10ms, ampl ratio | % | 17 (5) | 197.8 (6.4) | 17 (5) | 181.1 (7.2) | 0.99 | 0.0086 ** |
| Burst 1, EPSP3 depr, ampl ratio | % | 17 (5) | 57.2 (1.8) | 17 (5) | 66.3 (2.6) | 0.95 | 0.0023 ** |
| Burst 1, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 1200 (38) | 17 (5) | 1301 (42) | 0.53 | 0.1 |
| Burst 2, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 1831 (82) | 17 (5) | 2091 (103) | 0.022 * | 0.2 |
| Burst 3, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 2088 (95) | 17 (5) | 2326 (126) | 0.034 * | 0.3 |
| Burst 4, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 2170 (94) | 17 (5) | 2469 (136) | 0.023 * | 0.24 |
| Burst 5, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 2157 (86) | 17 (5) | 2468 (134) | 0.017 * | 0.21 |
| Burst 6, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 2096 (81) | 17 (5) | 2388 (124) | 0.015 * | 0.21 |
| Burst 7, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 2031 (79) | 17 (5) | 2318 (118) | 0.015 * | 0.2 |
| Burst 8, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 1957 (75) | 17 (5) | 2239 (114) | 0.015 * | 0.19 |
| Burst 9, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 1897 (73) | 17 (5) | 2169 (107) | 0.017 * | 0.18 |
| Burst 10, ave amplitude | µV | 17 (5) | 1854 (73) | 17 (5) | 2118 (103) | 0.017 * | 0.18 |
| Burst 2-4 ave amplitude vs Burst 1 | % | 17 (5) | 168.6 (4.4) | 17 (5) | 175.8 (6.7) | 0.0095 ** | 0.56 |
| Burst 8-10 ave amplitude vs Burst 2-4 | % | 17 (5) | 94.1 (1.5) | 17 (5) | 95 (1) | 0.3 | 0.65 |
Long Term Potentiation
Variables shown are: LTP vs PTP, amplitude ratio, Reduction in potentiation from immediately after theta-burst stimulation to one hour later, fEPSP amplitude ratio. LTP based on amplitude, Long term potentiation, ratio of amplitudes of fEPSPs in test pathway and control pathway.
| Variable | Units | Wildtype slices (animals) | Wildtype mean (SEM) | Mutant slices (animals) | Mutant mean (SEM) | P(animals) | P(mutation) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LTP vs PTP, amplitude ratio | % | 17 (5) | 78.6 (1) | 17 (5) | 76.4 (1.1) | 0.28 | 0.19 |
| LTP based on amplitude | % | 17 (5) | 178.8 (5.5) | 17 (5) | 172.8 (6.9) | 0.76 | 0.43 |
Behaviour raw data
| Animals | View |
| Elevated Plus Maze | View |
| Open Field | View |
| Novel Object Exploration | View |
| Rotarod | View |
Hippocampal slice electrophysiology raw data
| Animals and Brain slices | View |
| Field EPSP (Maximum) | View |
| Paired Pulse Facilitation | View |
| Long Term Potentiation | View |
| Data Files | View |