Figure 6.

Grouped data of the effects of CBI-5/6 hyperpolarization. A, The normalized protraction duration, before, during (Hyp), and after CBI-5/6 hyperpolarization in EN-elicited egestive programs (see Fig. 3). B, The normalized protraction duration, before, during, and after CBI-5/6 hyperpolarization in CBI-2-elicited ingestive programs (see Fig. 4). C, The lengthening effect of CBI-5/6 hyperpolarization is not caused by variability of different preparations we used. In four preparations, we examined the effects of CBI-5/6 hyperpolarization both in EN-elicited egestive programs (C1) and in CBI-2-elicited ingestive programs (C2). Graphs in C1 and C2 represent a subset of data in A and B, respectively. D, The normalized protraction duration before, during, and after CBI-5/6 hyperpolarization in CBI-2-elicited egestive programs (see Fig. 5). E, The mean latencies of CBI-5/6 firing relative to the termination of I2N activity in EN-elicited egestive programs (EN-eg), in CBI-2-elicited ingestive programs (CBI-2-in), and in CBI-2-elicited egestive programs (CBI-2-eg). Latency of CBI-5/6 firing was calculated as the time that elapsed from the last extracellular signal peak recorded in I2N to the first peak of the antidromic spike recorded in CBI-5/6 soma. If the first antidromic spike preceded the last signal in I2N, we defined the latency of CBI-5/6 firing as negative, and if the first antidromic spike followed the last signal in I2N, we defined the latency of CBI-5/6 firing as positive. *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001 (Bonferroni's post-test). Error bars indicate SEM.