Figure 6: _LFPI decreases SWR amplitude.

(A) Example SWR event recorded across all electrode contacts from a single shank (st. pyr channel labeled and colored blue), the associated time-frequency map from the st. pyr channel (red contour outlines where ripple event exceeds amplitude threshold; white dashed lines mark edges of ripple event in time), and the frequency-amplitude spectrum of the event averaged over time between white dashed lines

(B) Percentage of SWRs that were detected while the animal was still (sham: familiar=96.7±0.7%, novel=97.5±0.3%, injured: familiar=97.9±0.7%, novel=96.9±0.7%; mean±SEM; points represent individual animals).

(C) SWR event rate normalized to the amount of time animals were still (sham: familiar=0.26±0.03 Hz, novel=0.56±0.05 Hz, p=0.011; injured: familiar=0.36±0.03 Hz, novel=0.52±0.03 Hz, p=0.052; t-test; mean±SEM; points represent individual animals).

(D) Average (mean±SEM) frequency-amplitude spectrum of all ripples across conditions.

(E) Left: cumulative distributions of ripple amplitudes across conditions (familiar: sham=91.2±1.7 mV, n=490, injured=73.3±0.9 mV, n=1082, p<0.001; novel: sham=126.2±1.6 mV, n=1285, injured=98.4±1.3 mV, n=1464, p<0.001; sham still vs moving: p<0.001; injured still vs moving: p<0.001; mean±SEM; ks-test). Right: cumulative distributions of ripple durations across conditions (familiar: sham=34.3±0.9 ms, injured=34.7±0.6 ms, p=0.019; novel: sham=36.9±0.5 ms, injured=38.5±0.5 ms, p=0.062; sham still vs moving: p<0.001; injured still vs moving: p<0.001; mean±SEM; ks-test).