Skip to main content
. 2020 Sep 1;32(9):108097. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2020.108097

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Cross-linking AMPAR during SWE Alters the Recovery of Gap-Crossing Skills

(A) Overview of the gap-crossing task.

(B) Schematic of the experimental strategy. Mice learn the task before SWE is induced, during which IgG is injected. The supposed effects of SWE on whisker-evoked PSP in the presence of IgG are indicated below.

(C) Top: averaged (± SEM) fraction of gap-crossing success for different gap distances in non-injected mice. Bottom: tests in sessions 5 to 7 were omitted to assess the role of learning during SWE. ns, not significant.

(D) Mean (± SEM) fraction of success in the final session (normalized to session 4 before SWE) at 65 mm for mice that are tested every day (test) and for mice that were not tested in sessions 5 to 7 (no test). Triangles, individual mice (test, n = 6; no test, n = 5).

(E) Averaged (± SEM) fraction of gap-crossing success for different gap distances in anti-GFP-injected (left) and anti-GluA2-injected (right) mice.

(F) Averaged (± SEM) fraction of gap-crossing success at 65 mm in non-injected (orange), anti-GFP-injected (green), and anti-GluA2-injected (purple) mice.

(G) Mean (± SEM) fraction of success at 65 mm after expertise in FWE mice and during SWE. Triangles, individual mice (anti-GFP, n = 7; anti-GluA2, n = 7).