Table 3.
Proportion of excitatory responses
| Comparison | Test | p value | Significant | Median control (C) | Median mint (M) | Median hexanal (H) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ratio of excitatory responses | C;N= 14 | M;N= 14 | H;N= 14 | |||
| All odors | ANOVA | p< 0.0001 | Yes | 0.88 | 0.9235 | 0.9377 |
| All odors; C vs M | Tukey's | p< 0.0001 | Yes | 0.88 | 0.9235 | |
| All odors; C vs H | Tukey's | p< 0.0001 | Yes | 0.88 | 0.9377 | |
| All odors; H vs M | Tukey's | p = 0.1313 | No | 0.9235 | 0.9377 | |
|
Ratio of activating
odorants |
C;N= 225 | M;N= 268 | H;N= 369 | |||
| All groups | Kruskal--Wallis | p< 0.0001 | Yes | 13 | 14 | 14 |
| C vs M | Tukey's | p< 0.0001 | Yes | 13 | 14 | |
| C vs H | Tukey's | p< 0.0001 | Yes | 13 | 14 | |
| H vs M | Tukey's | p>0.9999 | No | 14 | 14 |
Comparisons of proportion of excitatory odor-evoked responses from control, mint-, and hexanal-exposed groups. Data shown in Figure 5.