Table 4.

Statistics table

Data structureType of testPower
Figure 1B2Not assumed*KW tests with Bonferroni correction**TII vs TIb, p = 6.60 × 10−15
TII vs TIs, p = 6.31 × 10−18
Figure 1B3Not assumedKW tests with Bonferroni correctionTII vs TIs, p = 6.31 × 10−8
TIs vs TIb, p = 3.40 × 10−13
Figure 1B4Not assumedKW tests with Bonferroni correctionTII vs TIb, p = 5.90 × 10−13
TIs vs TIb, p = 1.41 × 10−14
Figure 2CNot assumedKW tests with Bonferroni correction10 Hz, TII vs TIb, p = 0.000835
10 Hz, TII vs TIs, p = 3.08 × 10−5
20 Hz, TII vs TIb, p = 0.000835
20 Hz, TIs vs TIb, p = 0.00706
40 Hz, TII vs TIb, p = 0.000835
40 Hz, TIs vs TIb, p = 0.00706
Figure 2DNot assumedKW tests with Bonferroni correction2 Hz, TII vs TIb, p = 0.0628
10 Hz, TIs vs TIb, p = 0.0489
10 Hz, TII vs TIb, p = 0.0271
20 Hz, TIs vs TIb, p = 0.0489
40 Hz, TIs vs TII, p = 0.0628
Figure 4BNot assumedKW tests with Bonferroni correctionTIs, eag Sh vs control, p = 2.78 × 10−5
TIs, 4-AP vs control, p = 0.0177
TII, TEA vs control, p = 0.00942
TII, eag Sh vs control, p = 0.0302
Figure 4DNot assumedKW tests with Bonferroni correctionTII, TEA vs control, p = 0.131
TIs, 4-AP vs control, p = 0.0177
TIs, Sh vs control, p = 0.00228
TIs, eag Sh vs control, p = 4.29 × 10−5
Figure 10BNot assumedKW tests with Bonferroni correctionTII, 2 Hz, bss1 vs control, p = 0.0337
TII, 10 Hz, para vs control, p = 0.0441
TII, 20 Hz, para vs control, p = 0.0335
Figure 13BNormalt testsTIb, 80 Hz, pH 8.8 vs pH 7.2, p = 0.00665
TIs, 40 Hz, pH 8.8 vs pH 7.2, p = 0.00222
TIs, 80 Hz, pH 8.8 vs pH 7.2, p = 0.000524
TII, 10 Hz, pH 8.8 vs pH 7.2, p = 0.000585
TII, 20 Hz, pH 8.8 vs pH 7.2, p = 0.0283
TII, 40 Hz, pH 8.8 vs pH 7.2, p = 0.0232
Figure 13CNormalt testsTIb, 80 Hz, pH 8.8 vs pH 7.2, p = 0.00665
TIs, 40 Hz, pH 8.8 vs pH 7.2, p = 0.0463
Figure 13DNormalt testsTIb, 40 Hz, pH 8.8 vs pH 7.2, p = 0.00665
TII, 10 Hz, pH 8.8 vs pH 7.2, p = 0.0358
Figure 13ENormalANOVA and Fisher’s LSD testsAcross all boutons and frequencies,
Group a vs group b and c, p < 0.001
Group b vs group c, p < 0.05
Figure 14DNot assumedKW tests with Bonferroni correctionTIb, 20 Hz, 60 vs 20 min, p = 0.013
TIb, 40 Hz, 60 vs 20 min, p = 8.78 × 10−9
TIb, 40 Hz, 60 min vs NoDNP, p = 9.11 × 10−9
TIs, 10 Hz, 60 vs 20 min, p = 7.54 × 10−7
TIs, 20 Hz, 60 min vs NoDNP, p = 3.12 × 10−8
TIs, 20 Hz, 60 vs 20 min, p = 0.00206
TIs, 40 Hz, 60 min vs NoDNP, p = 2.43 × 10−8
TIs, 40 Hz, 60 vs 20 min, p = 6.14 × 10−8
TII, 10 Hz, 20 min vs NoDNP, p = 0.0126
TII, 20 Hz, 20 min vs NoDNP, p = 1.34 × 10−7
TII, 40 Hz, 20 min vs NoDNP, p = 2.61 × 10−10
Figure 14ENot assumedKW tests with Bonferroni correctionTIb, 40 Hz, 60 min vs NoDNP, p = 7.24 × 10−5
TIb, 40 Hz, 60 vs 20 min, p = 4.39 × 10−4
TIs, 20 Hz, 60 min vs NoDNP, p = 0.00141
TIs, 40 Hz, 60 min vs NoDNP, p = 0.000198
TII, 20 Hz, 20 min vs NoDNP, p = 7.23 × 10−7
TII, 40 Hz, 20 min vs NoDNP, p = 7.86 × 10−8
Figure 14FNot assumedKW tests with Bonferroni correctionTIb, 10 Hz, 60 min vs NoDNP, p = 2.66 × 10−4
TIb, 10 Hz, 60 vs 20 min, p = 8.05 × 10−5
TIb, 20 Hz, 60 vs 20 min, p = 2.02 × 10−8
TIb, 20 Hz, 60 min vs NoDNP, p = 1.65 × 10−8
TIb, 20 Hz, 20 min vs NoDNP, p = 2.23 × 10−9
TIb, 40 Hz, 60 vs 20 min, p = 8.88 × 10−4
TIb, 40 Hz, 60 min vs NoDNP, p = 9.80 × 10−10
TIb, 40 Hz, 20 min vs NoDNP, p = 1.27 × 10−9
TIs, 10 Hz, 60 min vs NoDNP, p = 4.15 × 10−5
TIs, 10 Hz, 20 min vs NoDNP, p = 8.53 × 10−6
TIs, 20 Hz, 60 min vs NoDNP, p = 0.000114
TIs, 20 Hz, 20 min vs NoDNP, p = 0.00312
TII, 40 Hz, 20 min vs NoDNP, p = 1.83 × 10−11
Figure 15Normalt tests with Bonferroni correctionTIb vs TIs, p = 0.044
TIb vs TII, p = 3.73 × 10−13
TIs vs TII, p = 9.46 × 10−6

  • ↵* KW tests do not assume that the data structure is normal.

  • ↵** All p values involving Bonferroni correction have been multiplied with the number of comparisons within the same group of data, whereas the significance levels are set at 0.05, 0.01, and 0.001 for clarity of display in the figures.