Table 1.
Statistical analyses in each figure
| Figure. | Test | Post hoc comparison | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1A | Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA Interaction Time effect Group effect |
F(5,105) = 244.487 F(5,105) = 242.251 F(1,21) = 8301.849 |
p < 0.001 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 |
Unpaired t test At baseline p = 0.661 At d 3, d 7, d 14, d 21, d 28, p < 0.001 |
| 1B | Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA Interaction Time effect Group effect |
F(4,84) = 256.839 F(4,84) = 129.061 F(1,21) = 120.307 |
p < 0.001 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 |
Unpaired t test At baseline p = 0.205 At d 7, d 14, d 21, d 28, p < 0.001 |
| 1C | Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA Interaction Time effect Group effect |
F(4,84) = 9.904 F(4,84) = 20.153 F(1,21) = 143.027 |
p < 0.001 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 |
Unpaired t test At baseline p = 0.079 At d 7, d 14, d 21, d 28, p < 0.001 |
| 1D | Student’s t test | t(10) = −15.218 | p < 0.001 | |
| 1E | Student’s t test | t(10) = 0.418 | p = 0.685 | |
| 2I | Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA Interaction Time effect Group effect |
F(18 234) = 3.012 F(6234) = 8.585 F(3,39) = 28.712 |
p < 0.001 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 |
Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test (vs DNP+GFAP-mCherry) Baseline: DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.703; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.996; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 1.0 mg/kg, p = 0.947; 1 h: DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.827; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.005; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 1.0 mg/kg, p < 0.001 2 h: DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.371; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.004; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 1.0 mg/kg, p < 0.001 3 h: DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.049; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 1.0 mg/kg, p < 0.001 4 h: DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.666; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.003; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 1.0 mg/kg, p < 0.001 5 h: DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.980; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.359; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 1.0 mg/kg, p = 0.045 6 h: DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.752; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.889; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 1.0 mg/kg, p = 0.176 |
| 2J | Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA Interaction Time effect Group effect |
F(18,234) = 3.012 F(6,234) = 8.585 F(3,39) = 28.712 |
p < 0.001 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 |
Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test (vs DNP+GFAP-mCherry) DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.049; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO 1.0 mg/kg, p < 0.001 |
| 2K | Paired-samples t test Wilcoxon signed-rank test |
Baseline vs d 21 t(10) = 6.643 d 21 vs 0.3 mg/kg, t(10) = −4.837 d 21 vs 1.0 mg/kg, t(10) = −5.041 Baseline vs d 7 Z = −2.756 Baseline vs d 14 Z = −2.756 d 21 vs 0.1 mg/kg, Z = −2.805 |
p < 0.001 p = 0.001 p = 0.001 p = 0.006 p = 0.003 p = 0.005 |
/ |
| 2L | Student’s t test | t(9) = 7.128 | p < 0.001 | / |
| 3B | Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA Interaction Time effect Group effect |
F(18,216) = 4.043 F(6,216) = 15.152 F(3,36) = 15.135 |
p < 0.001 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 |
Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test (vs GFAP+mCherry) Baseline: GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.920; GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.985; GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.780 1 h: GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.979; GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.002; GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 2 h: GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.106; GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p < 0.001; GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 3 h: GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.159; GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.001; GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 4 h: GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.205; GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.004; GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 5 h: GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.787; GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.894; GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.068 6 h: GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.856; GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.872; GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.711 |
| 3C | Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA Interaction Time effect Group effect |
F(18,216) = 4.043 F(6,216) = 15.152 F(3,36) = 15.135 |
p < 0.001 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 |
Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test (vs GFAP+mCherry). GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.106; GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p < 0.001; GFAP-M3+mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 |
| 3D | Paired-samples t test |
Baseline vs d 22 t(11) = 4.5 Baseline vs d 25 t(11) = 5.94 Baseline vs d 28 t(11) = 9.594 |
p = 0.001 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 |
|
| 3E | Student’s t test | t(8) = −13.031 | p < 0.001 | |
| 4B | One-way ANOVA | F(5,27) = 27.601 | p < 0.001 | Games-Howell multiple comparisons test Control vs DNP p = 0.005; DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry+CNO vs DNP p = 0.007; DNP+GFAP-mCherry vs DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry p < 0.001; GFAP-M3+mCherry vs DNP p = 1.000; GFAP-mCherry vs GFAP-M3+mCherry p = 0.017 |
| 5E | Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA Interaction Time effect Group effect |
F(18,252) = 4.058 F(6,252) = 16.851 F(3,42) = 80.494 |
p < 0.001 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 |
Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test (vs DNP+CaMKII-mCherry) Baseline: DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.584; DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.554; DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.373 1 h: DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.152; DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p < 0.001; DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 2 h: DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.309; DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p < 0.001; DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 3 h: DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.249; DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p < 0.001; DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 4 h: DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.228; DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p < 0.001; DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 5 h: DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.463; DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.011; DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 6 h: DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.792; DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.130; DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.431 |
| 5F | Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA Interaction Time effect Group effect |
F(18,252) = 4.058 F(6,252) = 16.851 F(3,42) = 80.494 |
p < 0.001 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 |
Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test (vs DNP+CaMKII-mCherry) DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.249; DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p < 0.001; DNP+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 |
| 5G | Paired-samples t test |
Baseline vs d 7 t(11) = 3.522 Baseline vs d 14 t(11) = 6.204 Baseline vs d 21 t(11) = 10.724 d 21: 0.03 mg/kg, t(11) = −1.07 d 21: 0.1 mg/kg, t(11) = −8.141 d 21: 0.3 mg/kg, t(11) = −8.31 |
p = 0.005 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 p = 0.307 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 |
/ |
| 5H | Mann–Whitney test | Z = −2.739 | p = 0.004 | / |
| 6B | Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA Interaction Time effect Group effect |
F(18,264) = 4.227 F(6,264) = 11.731 F(3,44) = 24.086 |
p < 0.001 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 |
Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test (vs CaMKII-mCherry) Baseline: CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.989; CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 1.000; CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.394 1 h: CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.882; CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.002; CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 2 h: CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.847; CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p < 0.001; CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 3 h: CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.978; CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.002; CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.001 4 h: CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 1.000; CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.008; CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.001 5 h: CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.995; 0 CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.017 6 h: CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.999; CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p = 0.808; CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.509 |
| 6C | Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA Interaction Time effect Group effect |
F(18,264) = 4.227 F(6,264) = 11.731 F(3,44) = 24.086 |
p < 0.001 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 |
Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test (vs CaMKII-mCherry) CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.03 mg/kg, p = 0.847; CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.1 mg/kg, p < 0.001; CaMKII-M3-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 |
| 6D | Paired-samples t test |
Baseline: 0.03 mg/kg, t(11) = −1.322 Baseline: 0.1 mg/kg, t(11) = 3955 Baseline: 0.3 mg/kg, t(11) = 8.842 |
p = 0.213 p = 0.002 p < 0.001 |
|
| 6E | Mann–Whitney test | Z = −2.887 | p = 0.004 | |
| 7C | Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA Interaction Time effect Group effect |
F(12,186) = 9.543 F(6,186) = 41.155 F(2,31) = 97.073 |
p < 0.001 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 |
Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test (vs Control) Baseline: GFAP-M3+CaMKII-mCherry+ CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 1.000; GFAP-M3+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.750 1 h: GFAP-M3+ CaMKII-mCherry+ CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 1.000; GFAP-M3+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 2 h: GFAP-M3+ CaMKII-mCherry+ CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 1.000; GFAP-M3+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 3 h: GFAP-M3+ CaMKII-mCherry+ CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 1.000; GFAP-M3+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 4 h: GFAP-M3+ CaMKII-mCherry+ CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 1.000; GFAP-M3+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 5 h: GFAP-M3+ CaMKII-mCherry+ CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 1.000; GFAP-M3+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 6 h: GFAP-M3+ CaMKII-mCherry+ CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 1.000; GFAP-M3+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p = 0.117 |
| 7D | Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA Interaction Time effect Group effect |
F(12,186) = 9.543 F(6,186) = 41.155 F(2,31) = 97.073 |
p < 0.001 p < 0.001 p < 0.001 |
Dunnett’s multiple comparisons test GFAP-M3+CaMKII-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, vs Control p = 1.000; GFAP-M3+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, vs Control p < 0.001; GFAP-M3+CaMKII-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, vs GFAP-M3+CaMKII-M4-mCherry+CNO 0.3 mg/kg, p < 0.001 |
| 8B | One-way ANOVA | F(5,30) = 4.185 | p = 0.007 | LSD’s multiple comparisons test Control vs DNP, p = 0.005 DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry vs DNP, p = 0.017 DNP+GFAP-mCherry vs DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry, p = 0.022 GFAP-M3+mCherry vs DNP, p = 0.484 GFAP-mCherry vs GFAP-M3+mCherry, p = 0.034 |
| 8C | One-way ANOVA | F(5,30) = 8.864 | p < 0.001 | LSD’s multiple comparisons test Control vs DNP, p < 0.001 DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry vs DNP, p = 0.008 DNP+GFAP-mCherry vs DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry, p = 0.005 GFAP-M3+mCherry vs DNP, p = 0.937 GFAP-mCherry vs GFAP-M3+mCherry, p < 0.001 |
| Extended Data 2-1 | One-way ANOVA | F(2,17) = 64.755 | p < 0.001 | Bonferroni multiple comparisons test DNP vs DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry, p < 0.001 DNP vs DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry washout, p = 0.083 DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry vs DNP+GFAP-M4-mCherry washout, p < 0.001 |
| Extended Data 3-1 | One-way ANOVA | F(2,16) = 110.537 | p < 0.001 | Bonferroni multiple comparisons test Control vs GFAP-M3-mCherry, p < 0.001 Control vs GFAP-M3-mCherry washout, p = 1.000 GFAP-M3-mCherry vs GFAP-M3-mCherry washout, p < 0.001 |
Statistical data with their respective post hoc comparison test for the behavioral immunohistochemical and ELISA data. In all cases, p < 0.05 was used to indicate significance.