Table 1.
Summary of effects of genotype and age on parameters related to isoAsp accumulation.
| Group comparisonsa | Percent difference | P-valueb |
|---|---|---|
| PIMT Protein - Males | ||
| HZ vs WT: 8 mo | − 58.6 | 0.001 |
| HZ vs WT: 2 yr | − 67.8 | 0.002 |
| WT: 2 yr vs 8 mo | − 17.3 | 0.065 |
| HZ: 2 yr vs 8 mo | − 35.6 | 0.017 |
| PIMT Protein - Females | ||
| HZ vs WT: 8 mo | − 65.1 | 0.004 |
| HZ vs WT: 2 yr | − 65.4 | <0.001 |
| WT: 2 yr vs 8 mo | − 7.5 | 0.301 |
| HZ: 2 yr vs 8 mo | − 8.3 | 0.397 |
| PIMT Activity - Males | ||
| HZ vs WT: 8 mo | − 51.3 | <0.001 |
| HZ vs WT: 2 yr | − 50.5 | <0.001 |
| WT: 2 yr vs 8 mo | − 5.3 | 0.161 |
| HZ: 2 yr vs 8 mo | − 3.8 | 0.250 |
| PIMT Activity - Females | ||
| HZ vs WT: 8 mo | − 48.7 | <0.001 |
| HZ vs WT: 2 yr | − 48.9 | <0.001 |
| WT: 2 yr vs 8 mo | − 14.5 | 0.003 |
| HZ: 2 yr vs 8 mo | − 14.7 | 0.001 |
| IsoAsp levels - Males | ||
| HZ vs WT: 8 mo | + 27.3 | 0.032 |
| HZ vs WT: 2 yr | + 55.8 | 0.014 |
| WT: 2 yr vs 8 mo | + 5.3 | 0.600 |
| HZ: 2 yr vs 8 mo | + 28.8 | 0.078 |
| IsoAsp levels - Females | ||
| HZ vs WT: 8 mo | + 19.5 | 0.038 |
| HZ vs WT: 2 yr | + 29.6 | <0.001 |
| WT: 2 yr vs 8 mo | + 4.0 | 0.627 |
| HZ: 2 yr vs 8 mo | + 12.8 | 0.005 |
| CKB Activity - Males | ||
| HZ vs WT: 8 mo | − 21.1 | 0.001 |
| HZ vs WT: 2 yr | − 17.2 | <0.001 |
| WT: 2 yr vs 8 mo | − 12.8 | 0.009 |
| HZ: 8 mo vs 2 yr | − 8.6 | 0.017 |
| CKB Activity - Females | ||
| HZ vs WT: 8 mo | − 17.3 | <0.001 |
| HZ vs WT: 2 yr | − 17.4 | <0.001 |
| WT: 2 yr vs 8 mo | − 13.5 | 0.001 |
| HZ: 2 yr vs 8 mo | − 13.6 | <0.001 |
a
N = 4 mice per group in every comparison.
b
Students T-test, unpaired, except for HZ vs WT tests comparing PIMT expression. The latter T-test used pairing of adjacent lanes of the Western blots in Figs. 2A, 2B.