Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2019 Aug 19;222(16):jeb191254. doi: 10.1242/jeb.191254

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

© 2019. Published by The Company of Biologists Ltd

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium provided that the original work is properly attributed.

PMC Copyright notice

Fig. 6. — I7 and SRF lesions reduce radular opening and arching in vivo, and SRF lesions reduce feeding efficiency. (A) Effect of lesions (sham, I7, SRF or dual lesions) on normalized opening magnitude. Data show differences of means for each of five animals before and after lesions (animals served as their own controls; see Materials and Methods). Difference of means pre-sham surgery versus post-sham surgery, 0.024±0.085, mean±s.d., not significant, N=5 animals (5 bites from each); effect size=0.28. Pre-I7 lesion versus post-I7 lesion, −0.13±0.09, P<0.031, paired t-test, N=5 animals (5 bites from each); effect size=−1.4. Pre-SRF lesion versus post-SRF lesion, −0.30±0.091, P<0.0017, paired t-test, N=5 animals (5 bites from each); effect size=−3.3. Pre-dual lesions versus post-dual lesions, −0.28±0.073, P<0.0044, paired t-test, N=4 animals (5 bites from each); effect size=−3.8. Note that the effect size of either the SRF or of the dual lesions is larger than the effect size of lesioning I7 alone. (B) Effect of the same lesions on normalized ridge formation, again showing differences of means (N=4 animals in sham, I7 and SRF groups, N=3 in dual lesion group). Pre-sham surgery versus post-sham surgery, −0.082±0.072, P>0.1 (n.s.), N=4 animals (4 bites from each); effect size=−1.14. Pre-I7 lesion versus post-I7 lesion, −0.16±0.05, P<0.01, paired t-test, N=4 animals (4 bites from each); effect size=−3.2. SRF lesions alone: −0.45±0.085, P<0.0019, paired t-test, N=4 animals (4 bites from each); effect size=−5.3. Dual lesions: −0.38±0.081, P<0.015, paired t-test, N=3 animals (4 bites from each); effect size=−4.7. Note that the effect size of SRF or dual lesions is larger than the effect size of lesioning I7 alone. (C) Effects of sham, I7 and SRF lesions on feeding efficiency. Differences in mean number of swallows, pre-sham versus post-sham surgery, normalized by pre-sham mean swallows, −0.46±0.36, P<0.046, paired t-test, N=5; effect size=−1.3. Pre-I7 minus post-I7 lesions, −0.98±0.82, P=0.056, paired t-test, N=5; effect size=−1.2. Pre-SRF minus post-SRF lesions, −0.74±0.31, P<0.0062, paired t-test, N=5; effect size=−2.4. Note that the effect size of the SRF lesion is larger than that of either the sham or I7 lesions.