Fig. 1 |. Fear learning induces oPC proliferation in the mPFC.

a, Experimental paradigm for EdU injections and contextual fear conditioning. b, Freezing responses pre-shock and during 24-h recall for home cage (HC), contextual fear conditioned (CFC), no shock (NS) and immediate shock (IS) groups. One-way ANOVA (F_2,20 = 28.35, P < 0.0001) with Sidak’s post hoc tests comparing CFC versus NS (difference: −31.19 ± 6.179; 95% CI: −44.54 to −17.84; P < 0.0001) and CFC versus IS (difference: −32.94 ± 5.536; 95% CI: −44.81 to −21.07; P < 0.0001). c, Total EdU⁺ cell density in the mPFC of HC, CFC, NS and IS animals. One-way ANOVA (F_3,26 = 7.238, P = 0.0012) with Sidak’s post hoc tests comparing HC versus CFC (difference: −1.616 ± 0.5212; 95% CI: −2.946 to −0.2868; P = 0.0137), HC versus NS (difference: 0.7080 ± 0.5382; 95% CI: −0.6654 to 2.081; P = 0.4878) and HC versus IS (difference: −0.1819 ± 0.5212; 95% CI: −1.512 to 1.148; P = 0.9803). d, EdU⁺Olig2⁺ cell density in the mPFC of HC, CFC, NS and IS animals. One-way ANOVA (F_3,26 = 7.672, P = 0.0008) with Sidak’s post hoc tests comparing HC versus CFC (difference: −1.393 ± 0.47; 95% CI: −2.592 to −0.1933; P = 0.0192), HC versus NS (difference: 0.7474 ± 0.4854, 95% CI: −0.4912 to 1.986; P = 0.3544) and HC versus IS (difference: 0.1734 ± 0.47; 95% CI: −1.026 to 1.373; P = 0.9769) at 24 h post-conditioning. e,f, Representative images of EdU (green) and Olig2 (magenta) staining in the mPFC of HC (e) and CFC (f) animals, with arrows indicating colocalized EdU⁺Olig2⁺ cells; inset depicts separate color channels for representative EdU⁺ and Olig2⁺ cells. For all panels, n = 7 mice (HC), 8 mice (CFC), 7 mice (NS) or 8 mice (IS). Scale bar, 50 μm. For box-and-whisker plots, the center, boxes and whiskers represent the median, interquartile range, and the 10th and 90th percentiles, respectively. *P ≤ 0.05, ****P ≤ 0.0001.