Table 3. Statistical analysis of $\overline{CI}$ and Δ$\overline{CI}$ values for endogenous ERK1/2 and rERK2-LOC, 1 h and 2 h after serum or FGF4 stimulation.

	Treatments	$\overline{CI}$	n	S	p value	Fold-change	Δ$\overline{CI}$	Ratio rERK2-LOC / IF:ERK1/2
IF:ERK1/2	Baseline	0.267 ± 0.016	18
	1 h—serum	0.357 ± 0.013	21	**	0.0066	1.34	0.090 ± 0.021
	1 h—FGF4	0.343 ± 0.009	27	*	0.0172	1.29	0.077 ± 0.018
	2 h—serum	0.529 ± 0.029	19	****	< 0.0001	1.98	0.262 ± 0.033
	2 h—FGF4	0.449 ± 0.035	14	****	< 0.0001	1.68	0.183 ± 0.038
rERK2-LOC	Baseline	0.093 ± 0.018	13
	1 h—serum	0.189 ± 0.025	11	ns	0.4524	2.03	0.096 ± 0.031	1.07
	1 h—FGF4	0.367 ± 0.066	15	***	0.0003	3.95	0.274 ± 0.069	3.56
	2 h—serum	0.532 ± 0.053	16	****	< 0.0001	5.72	0.439 ± 0.055	1.68
	2 h—FGF4	0.486 ± 0.026	12	****	< 0.0001	5.23	0.393 ± 0.032	2.15

Statistical significance for differences among endogenous ERK1/2 and rERK2-LOC was tested by one-way ANOVA and Dunnett’s test, accepting p ≤ 0.05 as significant. The ratio between Δ$\overline{CI}$ of endogenous ERK1/2 and rERK2-LOC shows the differences in magnitude orders in function of the treatment. Symbols: $\overline{CI}$, average of CI values ± SEM; Δ$\overline{CI}$, difference between means compared to baseline value as reference; SEM, Standard Error of Mean; n, number of cells analyzed; S: statistically significant; ns, p > 0.05;

*, p ≤ 0.05;

**, p ≤ 0.01;

***, p ≤ 0.001;

****, p ≤ 0.0001.