Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: Neuropharmacology. 2014 May 24;85:263–283. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2014.05.010

Table 1.

Christensen et al., 2014

Threshold (mV) Spike width1/2 max (ms) Spike amplitude (mV) Rise slope Max (mV/ms) Decay slope max (mV/ms) AHP amplitude (mV) AHP minimum (mV)
All cells
Group I (n= 57) −30.4 ± 0.57 1.62 ± 0.05 80.1 ± 1.13 170 ± 9 −46.4 ± 2 −17.6 ± 0.59 −48.1 ± 0.64
Group II (n= 75) −34.1 ± 0.53* 1.23 ± 0.02* 84.8 ± 0.84* 220.5 ± 8* −63.4± 2* −20.1 ±0.4* −54.2 ± 0.51*
Bnos positive cells
Group I (n= 40) bnos+ −30.8 ± 0.67 1.67 ± 0.05 81.4 ± 1.25 173.3 ± 11 −44.9 ± 2 −17.7 ± 0.61 −48.4 ± 0.73
Group II (n= 50) bnos+ −34.6 ± 0.64* 1.26 ± 0.03* 84.8 ± 0.95* 215 ± 10* −61.3 ± 2* −20.3 ± 0.61* −54.9 ± 0.59*

Developmental-induced alterations in parameters governing the shape of the action potential and AHP. In the top part of the table, measured values for the examined parameters of the action potential across group I and group II are shown. The bottom half of the table shows the values of the examined parameters for bnos positive cells from group I and group II.

*

denotes statistical significances using a two-tailed t-test between the two age groups.