Skip to main content
. 2021 Feb 17;41(7):1470–1488. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0548-20.2020

Table 4.

Visual properties in CMD mice

Figure panel Measure V1 LM PM Statistic By cell or by animal V1 vs LM V1 vs PM LM vs PM
Figure 7A–C Sample size: # neurons (# mice) 726 (6 mice) 567 (4 mice) 216 (4 mice)
Figure 7A, left TF median (Hz) 1.4 1.91 2.21 KW test*, p = 0.0003, KW(s) = 16.5 By cell p = 0.0054 p = 0.0016 NS, p = 0.74
Figure 7A, right TF mean (Hz) 1.83 2.05 2.17 Hierarchical bootstrap By cell p = 0.031 p = 0.0047 NS, p = 0.10
Figure 7B, left SF median (cycle/°) 0.088 0.096 0.12 KW test*, NS, p = 0.034 By cell NS, p > 0.99 NS, p = 0.033 NS, p = 0.07
Figure 7B, right SF mean (cycle/°) 0.093 0.093 0.11 Hierarchical bootstrap By cell NS, p = 0.53 p = 0.045 NS, p = 0.08
Figure 7C, left Speed median (°/s) 19.4 22.2 21.1 KW test*, NS, p = 0.18 By cell NS, p = 0.24 NS, p > 0.99 NS, p = 0.68
Figure 7C, right Speed mean (°/s) 19.8 22 20 Hierarchical bootstrap By cell NS, p = 0.18 NS, p = 0.45 NS, p = 0.24

KW, Kruskal–Wallis. TF, SF, and TF/SF preferences of cells that were visually responsive in contralateral eye-deprived mice.

*Statistics with a multiple-comparisons correction.