Skip to main content
. 2021 Mar 10;13(4):e13328. doi: 10.15252/emmm.202013328

Figure 2. Results of the analysis of muscle tissue (MoMus dataset).

Figure 2

  • A
    Principal component analysis of the MoMus RNA‐seq counts.
  • B
    Volcano plot for the F test on differential expression between WT and mdx mice.
  • C
    Volcano plot for the F test on differential expression between WT and mdx++ mice.
  • D
    Volcano plot for the F test on differential expression between WT and mdx+− mice.
  • E, F
    Boxplot comparing the distribution of the Dmd and Prune2 genes in the WT, mdx, mdx++, and mdx+− mice groups. The central band of the boxplot denotes the median; the box denotes the first and third quartile; the whiskers are computed as min(max(x), Q3 + 1.5 * IQR) and max(min(x), Q1 – 1.5 * IQR), where min(x) and max(x) denote the minimum and maximum of the distribution, Q1 and Q3 the first and third quartile, and IQR the interquartile range.
  • G
    Volcano plot for the F tests on differential expression between mdx++ and mdx+− mice.
  • H–J
    Scatter plots comparing the estimated logFCs across mice groups. Panel H: mdx vs. mdx++. Panel I: mdx vs mdx+−. Panel J: mdx++ vs. mdx+−.
  • K
    Heatmap obtained by Ingenuity Pathway Analysis showing the most affected pathways across mdx, mdx++, and mdx+− mice.