Skip to main content
. 2021 Jan 5;8(1):ENEURO.0257-20.2020. doi: 10.1523/ENEURO.0257-20.2020

Table 3.

The effects of ML-9 on AII mEPSC frequency under different conditions

Data Data structure Type of test Power Mean ± SEM Number of cells
Control Non-normal distribution 1.00 ± 0.00 10
100 μm ML-9 Normal distribution 7.19 ± 1.32 10
a Control vs ML-9 Wilcoxon
signed-rank test
p = 0.0020
0 Ca2+
(experimental condition 1)
Normal distribution 0.28 ± 0.07 10
0 Ca2+ + ML-9 Normal distribution 3.35 ± 0.57 10
b 0 Ca2+ vs 0 Ca2+ + ML-9 paired t test p = 0.0001
0 Ca2+ + BAPTA-AM
(experimental condition 2)
Normal distribution 0.28 ± 0.07 9
0 Ca2+ + BAPTA-AM + ML-9 Non-normal distribution 4.04 ± 0.85 9
c 0 Ca2+ + BAPTA-AM vs
0 Ca2+ + BAPTA-AM + ML-9
Wilcoxon
signed-rank test
p = 0.0039
Relative effect of ML-9 under different
conditions
ML-9 effect under control condition Normal distribution 7.19 ± 1.32 10
ML-9 effect under experimental condition 1 Non-normal distribution 18.69 ± 4.64 10
ML-9 effect under experimental condition 2 Non-normal distribution 20.31 ± 5.12 9
d ML-9 (experimental condition 1) vs ML-9
(control condition)
Mann–Whitney test p = 0.0232
e ML-9 (experimental condition 2) vs ML-9
(control condition)
Mann–Whitney test p = 0.0030

0 Ca2+: remove extracellular Ca2+.