Statistical table
| Figure | Data structure | Type of test | Sample size | Statistical data |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Figure 2B | Two-factors (genotype and taste field); data are counts | Kruskal–Wallis test followed by Dunn test for multiple comparisons | WT mice: 6 mice CV: 110 buds FF: 19 buds SP: 15 buds KO mice: 6 mice CV: 125 buds FF: 16 buds SP: 17 buds | χ2(5, N = 302) = 219.74, p < 0.0001 CV_WT vs CV_KO: p < 0.0001 FF_WT vs FF_KO: p = 0.0395 SP_WT vs SP_KO: p = 0.00331 |
| Figure 3A | Two-factors (genotype and tastants); data are continuous | Two-way ANOVA | WT mice: n = 6 Skn-1a-/- mice: n = 6 | Genotype: F(1,91) = 12.755, p < 0.001 Interaction: F(7,91) = 3.315, p = 0.004 Holm–Sidak’s multiple comparisons test: KO/WT, NH4CL: p = 0.282 KO/WT, Suc: p = 0.008 KO/WT, Qui: p = 0.034 KO/WT, Msg: p = 0.039 KO/WT, NaCl: p = 0.008 KO/WT, Msg+Imp: p = 0.007 KO/WT, Hcl: p = 0.127 KO/WT, Ca: p = 0.975 |
| Figure 3B | Two-factors (genotype and tastants) | Two-way ANOVA | WT mice: n = 5 KO mice: n = 9 | Genotype: F(1,41) = 6.726, p = 0.014 Interaction: F(2,41) = 0.976, p = 0.386 |
| Figure 4C | Categorical | χ2 | WT cells: 3262 from 3 mice KO cells: 4236 from 4 mice | χ2(2, N = 7498) = 5.312, p = 0.070 |
| Figure 4D | Categorical | χ2 | WT cells: 3262 from 3 mice KO cells: 4236 from 4 mice | χ2(3, N = 7498) = 5.064, p = 0.167 |
| Figure 5C | Two-factors (genotype and stimulus) | Two-way ANOVA | WT cells: 7 KO cells: 6 | Genotype: F(1,38) = 0.0670, p = 0.797 Interaction: F(2,38) = 0.0272, p = 0.973 |
| Figure 5D | Two-factors (genotype and stimulus) | Two-way ANVOA | WT cells: 4 KO cells: 6 | Genotype F(1,29) = 0.0156, p = 0.902 Interaction: F(2,29) = 0.409, p = 0.669 |
| Figure 6C | Two-factors (genotype and taste field) | Kruskal–Wallis test | WT taste buds: 166 KO taste buds: 207 | χ2(7, N = 302) = 7.0057, p = 0.4283 |
| Figure 7C | Two-factors (genotype and taste field) | Kruskal–Wallis test followed by Dunn test for multiple comparisons | WT taste buds: 74 KO taste buds: 154 | χ2(7, N = 302) = 57.047, p < 0.0001 CV_WT vs CV_KO: p = 0.0181 FOL_CV vs FOL_KO: p < 0.0135 FF_WT vs FF_KO: p > 0.05 SP_WT vs SP_KO: p > 0.05 |
| Figure 9 | Normal distribution | Paired t test vs artificial saliva | WT NaCl: 10 WT CA: 9 KO NaCl: 5 KO CA: 8 | WT NaCl: t(9) = 2.363, p = 0.0424 WT CA: t(8) = 2.697, p = 0.027 KO NaCl: t(4) = 1.262, p = 0.275 KO CA: t(7) = 0.473, p = 0.650 |