Table 3.
Statistical analysis for Figure 5
| Set of data | Type of statistical analysis | Results of statistical analysis | |
|---|---|---|---|
| A, P-Thr34 D32/D32 | |||
| The basal phosphorylation levels | One-way ANOVA | F(6,41) = 1.252 | p = 0.0304 |
| CGS21680 effect in each subregion | |||
| Subregion (1): control vs CGS | Paired t test | t(6) = 4.821 | p = 0.0029 |
| Subregion (2-1): control vs CGS | t test (Welch's-correction) | t(6.548) = 3.158 | p = 0.0174 |
| Subregion (2-2): control vs CGS | t test (Welch's-correction) | t(6.429) = 6.529 | p < 0.001 |
| Subregion (2-3): control vs CGS | t test (Welch's-correction) | t(6.668) = 2.914 | p = 0.0238 |
| Subregion (3): control vs CGS | t test (Welch's-correction) | t(6.14) = 2.563 | p = 0.0419 |
| Subregion (4): control vs CGS | t test (Welch's-correction) | t(7.008) = 2.962 | p = 0.0210 |
| Subregion (5): control vs CGS | t test (Welch's-correction) | t(7.251) = 3.012 | p = 0.0188 |
| Two-way ANOVA for all subregions | |||
| CGS effect | Two-way ANOVA | F(1,83) = 84.32 | p < 0.001 |
| Subregion effect | Two-way ANOVA | F(6,83) = 2.112 | p = 0.0604 |
| CGS-subregion interaction | Two-way ANOVA | F(6,83) = 2.656 | p = 0.0209 |
| CGS: subregion (1) vs (3) | Bonferroni post hoc test | p = 0.0259 | |
| CGS: subregion (1) vs (4) | Bonferroni post hoc test | p < 0.001 | |
| CGS: subregion (1) vs (5) | Bonferroni post hoc test | p < 0.001 | |