Table 2.

Statistics for Figure 2

GraphData structureType of testp
Fig. 2B, bin 1NonparametricSteel–DwassCont vs Puncture only, p = 0.9990;
Cont vs pDNA injection, p = 0.0011;
Cont vs Electrical shock only, p = 0.9973;
Cont vs TE buffer injection, p = 0.9871
Fig. 2B, bin 2NonparametricSteel–DwassCont vs Puncture only, p = 0.9781;
Cont vs pDNA injection, p = 0.0369;
Cont vs Electrical shock only, p = 0.9937;
Cont vs TE buffer injection, p = 0.9996
Fig. 2B, bin 3NonparametricSteel–DwassCont vs Puncture only, p = 1.0000;
Cont vs pDNA injection, p = 0.0055;
Cont vs Electrical shock only, p = 0.9976;
Cont vs TE buffer injection, p = 0.9976
Fig. 2B, bin 4NonparametricSteel–DwassCont vs Puncture only, p = 0.9992;
Cont vs pDNA injection, p = 0.0154;
Cont vs Electrical shock only, p = 0.9964;
Cont vs TE buffer injection, p = 0.9996
Fig. 2B, bin 5NonparametricSteel–DwassCont vs Puncture only, p = 0.9473;
Cont vs pDNA injection, p = 0.1056;
Cont vs Electrical shock only, p = 0.9976;
Cont vs TE buffer injection, p = 1.0000
Fig. 2B, bin 6NonparametricSteel–DwassCont vs Puncture only, p = 0.9998;
Cont vs pDNA injection, p = 0.3261;
Cont vs Electrical shock only, p = 0.9962;
Cont vs TE buffer injection, p = 1.0000
Fig. 2CNonparametricSteel–DwassCont vs Puncture only, p = 0.9994;
Cont vs pDNA injection, p = 1.0000;
Cont vs Electrical shock only, p = 0.9969;
Cont vs TE buffer injection, p = 0.9981
Fig. 2DNonparametricSteel–DwassCont vs Puncture only, p = 0.9989;
Cont vs pDNA injection, p = 0.0015;
Cont vs Electrical shock only, p = 0.9994;
Cont vs TE buffer injection, p = 0.9913