Skip to main content
. 2019 Feb 5;42(5):zsz028. doi: 10.1093/sleep/zsz028

Table 1.

Statistical analysis of RMLFP power spectral data presented in Figure 2 and similar analyses for LPEEG data

Behavioral state Factor(s) DF F value P LPEEG p value
Waking Frequency 38, 266 16.33 0.000 0.000
Condition 1, 7 0.05 0.82 0.68
Time 1, 7 0.25 0.64 0.35
Frequency x Condition 38, 266 0.42 0.99 0.90
Frequency x Time 38, 266 2.03 0.001 0.000
Condition x Time 1, 7 3.41 0.11 0.73
Frequency x Condition x Time 38, 266 2.27 0.000 0.94
NREM Frequency 38, 266 22.93 0.000 0.000
Condition 1, 7 2.06 0.20 0.51
Time 1, 7 15.61 0.006 0.03
Frequency x Condition 38, 266 2.03 0.001 0.98
Frequency x Time 38, 266 16.28 0.000 0.000
Condition x Time 1, 7 2.23 0.18 0.14
Frequency x Condition x Time 38, 266 2.84 0.000 0.26
REM Frequency 38, 266 8.58 0.000 0.000
Condition 1, 7 0.24 0.64 0.50
Time 1, 7 3.91 0.09 0.26
Frequency x Condition 38, 266 1.38 0.08 0.94
Frequency x Time 38, 266 0.84 0.75 0.000
Condition x Time 1, 7 0.13 0.73 0.24
Frequency x Condition x Time 38, 266 0.47 0.99 0.64

Results from a three-way, repeated measures, ANOVA comparing effects of frequency (between 0.5 and 20 Hz with 0.5 Hz bins), condition (saline vs. ZIP), and time (early vs. late light period) on local field potential power at the site of injection. Significant p values are bolded with trends in presented in grey. p Values obtained from identical analyses performed on LPEEG data are presented in the final column.