Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Nov 30.
Published in final edited form as: Nature. 2017 May 31;546(7657):297–301. doi: 10.1038/nature22381

Extended Data Figure 3. Behavioral characterization of hit and non-hit subjects.

Extended Data Figure 3

a, Number of bouts, total duration, and latency for mating, self-grooming and huddling in hit (n = 9) and non-hit (n = 6) subjects. No significant differences exist between subject groups (all P > 0.05). b, Measures of mating and self-grooming duration and latency do not correlate with huddling latency (n = 15; all P > 0.05). “Percent M [or SG] before Hud latency” refers to percentage of time each animal spent mating or self-grooming prior to reaching its huddling latency. c, Latency is modulated across behaviors (n = 15; χ2(2) = 18.53, P < 0.001, Friedman Test), with mating and self-grooming showing shorter latencies compared to huddling but similar latencies to each other (SG vs. Hud, P < 0.001; M vs. Hud, P = 0.001; M vs. SG, P = 0.454, Wilcoxon signed-rank). Reported P-values in a-c are Bonferroni-corrected for multiple comparisons (see Methods). Boxplots show median and interquartile range.