Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2024 Jan 26;25(3):1543. doi: 10.3390/ijms25031543

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

© 2024 by the authors.

Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

PMC Copyright notice

Uhrf2 knockout does not affect input–output characteristics, paired-pulse facilitation, and synaptic plasticity in the SC-CA2 pathway. (A) This is a schematic diagram that illustrates the placement of electrodes in the SC-CA2 region. (B) Input–output curves were generated for the SC-CA2 synaptic transmission in Uhrf2^+/+ (gray, n = 7), Uhrf2^+/− (green, n = 6), and Uhrf2^−/− mice (red, n = 7). fEPSP sample traces were presented with scale bars indicating an amplitude of 2 mV and a time interval of 5 ms. Statistical analysis using a two-way RM ANOVA revealed no significant differences in input–output curves among the different groups of mice (F (2, 17) = 0.13, p = 0.88). Post hoc comparisons using Sidak’s test also did not show any significant differences between groups per stimulation intensity (all p-values > 0.7). (C) Paired pulse facilitation fEPSP traces and ratios of P2/P1 fEPSP slopes were recorded for Uhrf2^+/+ (gray, n = 8), Uhrf2^+/− (green, n = 6), and Uhrf2^−/− (red, n = 7) mice. Scale bars are 1 mV/10 ms. (D) No significant differences in paired-pulse facilitation were observed between Uhrf2^+/+, Uhrf2^+/−, and Uhrf2^−/− mice (two-way RM ANOVA: F (2, 18) = 1.78, p = 0.12). Post hoc group comparisons per stimulus interval also revealed no significant differences (all p-values > 0.1). (E) LTP induction was observed in wild-type Uhrf2^+/+ mice (gray, n = 7) following three tetanic stimulations (3 × 100 Hz, indicated by blue arrows). (F) LTP induction was performed in Uhrf2^+/− mice (green, n = 6) after three tetanic stimulations. (G) LTP induction was also performed in Uhrf2^−/− mice (red, n = 6). (H) No detectable effect of genotype on fEPSP slope potentiation immediately after tetanization was observed in Uhrf2^+/+, Uhrf2^+/−, and Uhrf2^−/− mice (two-way RM ANOVA: F (2, 16) = 2.29, p = 0.14). Post hoc comparisons showed a significant difference between baseline and time 0 in wild-type mice (p = 0.044), while no significant differences were detectable in heterozygous and homozygous mice. (I) At the 90 min time point, there was no genotype effect on fEPSPs compared to baseline in Uhrf2^+/+, Uhrf2^+/−, and Uhrf2^−/− mice (two-way RM ANOVA: F (2, 16) = 0.12, p = 0.89). Post hoc comparisons also showed no significant differences between baseline and 90 min time points for any group (all p-values > 0.9). Representative fEPSP traces at −30 and 90 min are shown with 2 mV/5 ms scale bars.