(Fig. 2A, top) IB pull-down α |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST |
Two-factor, mean |
t test |
3/3 |
< 0.0001 |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(W197A)
|
Two-factor, mean |
t test |
3/3 |
< 0.0001 |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(195-199A)
|
Two-factor, mean |
t test |
3/3 |
< 0.0001 |
|
(Fig. 2A, middle) IB pull-down µ2 |
GST vs GST-Arc(WT)
|
Two-factor, mean |
t test |
3/3 |
< 0.0001 |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(W197A)
|
Two-factor, mean |
t test |
3/3 |
0.0007 |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(195-199A)
|
Two-factor, mean |
t test |
3/3 |
0.0039 |
|
(Fig. 2B) IB pull-down dyn2-GFP |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST |
Two-factor, mean |
t test |
3/3 |
< 0.0001 |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(W197A)
|
Two-factor, mean |
t test |
3/3 |
0.0159 |
|
(Fig. 2C) IB pull-down GFP-Triad3A |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST |
Two-factor, mean |
t test |
3/3 |
< 0.0001 |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(W197A)
|
Two-factor, mean |
t test |
3/3 |
0.0055 |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(195-199A)
|
Two-factor, mean |
t test |
3/3 |
0.0055 |
|
(Fig. 3A) IB Surface GluA1 |
pCIneo vs pArc(WT)
|
Two-factor, mean |
ANOVA Tukey’s |
3/3 |
0.1284 |
pCIneo vs pArc(W197A)
|
Two-factor, mean |
ANOVA Tukey’s |
4/4 |
0.5543 |
|
(Fig. 3B) IB Surface GluA2 |
pCIneo vs pArc(WT)
|
Two-factor, mean |
ANOVA Tukey’s |
4/4 |
>0.9999 |
pCIneo vs pArc(W197A)
|
Two-factor, mean |
ANOVA Tukey’s |
4/4 |
0.9637 |
|
(Fig. 3B) IB Surface EGFR |
pCIneo vs pArc(WT)
|
Two-factor, mean |
ANOVA Tukey’s |
4/4 |
0.6156 |
pCIneo vs pArc(W197A)
|
Two-factor, mean |
ANOVA Tukey’s |
4/4 |
0.7621 |
|
(Fig. 3F) IF Surface GluA1 |
mCherry vs mCherry-Arc(WT)
|
Two-factor, mean |
ANOVA Tukey’s |
59/60 |
<0.0001 |
mCherry vs mCherry-Arc(W197A)
|
Two-factor, mean |
ANOVA Tukey’s |
59/42 |
0.3438 |
|
(Fig. 3G) IF mCherry expression |
mCherry vs mCherry-Arc(WT)
|
Two-factor, mean |
ANOVA Tukey’s |
3/3 |
0.5625 |
mCherry vs mCherry-Arc(W197A)
|
Two-factor, mean |
ANOVA Tukey’s |
3/3 |
0.9211 |
|
(Fig. 3H) IB Arc expression |
mCherry-Arc(WT) vs mCherry- Arc(W197A)
|
Two-factor, mean |
ANOVA Tukey’s |
3/3 |
0.6892 |
mCherry-Arc(WT) vs mCherry- Arc(195-199A)
|
Two-factor, mean |
ANOVA Tukey’s |
3/3 |
0.4951 |
|
(Fig. 4) Arc–AP-2 interaction |
Arc(WT) vs untransfected amplitude frequency |
Two-factor, mean |
Mann–Whitney |
12/20 |
0.0002 0.47 |
Arc(W197A) vs untransfected amplitude frequency |
Two-factor, mean |
Mann–Whitney |
13/20 |
0.121 0.98 |
Arc(195-199A) vs untransfected amplitude frequency |
Two-factor, mean |
Mann–Whitney |
10/20 |
0.372 0.18 |
eGFP vs untransfected amplitude frequency |
Two-factor, mean |
Mann–Whitney |
7/20 |
0.376 0.39 |
|
(Fig. 5) cDNA constructs and mEPSC kinetics |
All constructs vs untransfected rise decay |
Two-factor, mean |
Mann–Whitney |
6/18 |
>0.05 >0.05 |
(Fig. 6) AP-2 requirement for Arc mediated changes in synaptic strength |
μ2-miRNA2 vs untransfected amplitude frequency |
Two-factor, mean |
Mann–Whitney |
9/12 |
0.07 0.37 |
Arc(WT) + μ2-miRNA2 vs untransfected amplitude frequency |
Two-factor, mean |
Mann–Whitney |
16/12 |
0.52 0.63 |
Arc(WT) + n.c.miRNA vs untransfected amplitude frequency |
Two-factor, mean |
Mann–Whitney |
7/12 |
0.001 0.08 |
μ2-miRNA3 vs untransfected amplitude frequency |
Two-factor, mean |
Mann–Whitney |
10/8 |
0.68 0.45 |
Arc(WT) + μ2-miRNA3 vs untransfected amplitude frequency |
Two-factor, mean |
Mann–Whitney |
6/8 |
0.27 0.14 |
|
(Fig. 7) The Arc-AP-2μ interaction is required for Arc-mediated changes in synaptic strength |
Arc(WT) +μ2-miRNA2+μ2 vs untransfected amplitude frequency |
Two-factor, mean |
Mann–Whitney |
14/14 |
0.0001 0.37 |
Arc(195-199A)+μ2-miRNA2+μ2 vs untransfected amplitude frequency |
Two-factor, mean |
Mann–Whitney |
9/14 |
0.46 0.64 |
|
(Fig. 8) AP-2 is required for homeostatic scaling |
Control vs bicuculline (untransfected) amplitude frequency |
Two-factor, mean |
Mann–Whitney |
10/15 |
0.0001 0.64 |
miRNA2 (bicuculline) vs untransfected (bicuculline) amplitude frequency |
Two-factor, mean |
Mann–Whitney |
6/15 |
0.0001 0.59 |
n.c.miRNA (bicuculline) vs untransfected amplitude frequency |
Two-factor, mean |
Mann–Whitney |
5/15 |
0.007 0.29 |
|