Table 2.

Parametric comparisons of dose–response relationships to 5-HT generated in wild-type and conditional smooth muscle–specific ANO1 KO mice

	EC50 (nM)	Maximum 5-HT contraction amplitude (normalized to KCl)	Slope factor p	N	Mean R 2
Wild-type
Control	209 ± 34	0.784 ± 0.073	1.57 ± 0.25	14	0.993 ± 0.004
ANO1-KO Δ exon 12
Oil-injected control	210 ± 36	0.771 ± 0.105	1.14 ± 0.17	4	0.993 ± 0.002
TMX-injected	125 ± 24	0.250 ± 0.034 a , b	1.54 ± 0.31	5	0.981 ± 0.008
ANO1-KO Δ exons 5/6
TMX-injected	195 ± 72	0.316 ± 0.056 a , c	0.96 ± 0.15	5	0.924 ± 0.062

Individual dose–response curves to 5-HT were least-square fitted to a logistic function of the following formalism: Y = A1 + [(A2 − A1)/(1 + ([5-HT]/EC₅₀)^p)], where Y is the contraction amplitude registered in the presence of 5-HT normalized to the high KCl-induced contraction, A1 and A2 are the minimum and maximum contraction amplitudes, respectively, [5-HT] is the concentration of 5-HT, EC₅₀ is the concentration of 5-HT producing a contraction that is 50% of maximum, and p is the slope factor. Because of the biphasic nature of the dose–response curves to 5-HT (see Fig. 1 and text for explanation), only the initial portion of each curve, thus ranging from 0.01 to 3 μM 5-HT, was analyzed to calculate the parameters shown in the table. All values are means ± SEM pooled from 4 to 14 animals (N). One-way ANOVA tests revealed significant differences in the maximum contraction amplitude between animal groups as shown (bolded numbers).

^aP < 0.01 versus wild-type control.

^bP < 0.01 versus ANO1-KO Δ exon 12.

^cP < 0.05 versus ANO1-KO Δ exon 12.