Table 1

Statistical analysis summary

FigureTest comparisonStatistical testResultPost hoc testpost-hoc comparisonAdjusted P value
2A Mouth-hook contractionComparisons between tastantsOne-way ANOVAF(3,102) = 7.901, P < 0.0001Dunnett's multiple comparison testControl vs CAF0.001
Control vs DEN>0.999
Control vs NIC<0.001
BendingF(3,102) = 8.846, P < 0.0001Control vs CAF0.092
Control vs DEN0.026
Control vs NIC0.026
Body wall contractionF(3,102) = 16.94, P < 0.0001Control vs CAF0.598
Control vs DEN0.628
Control vs NIC<0.001
2B Mouth-hook contractionComparisons between tastantsOne-way ANOVAF(3,76) = 4.355, P = 0.0069Dunnett's multiple comparison testControl vs CAF0.473
Control vs DEN0.060
Control vs NIC0.995
BendingF(3,76) = 4.773, P = 0.0042Control vs CAF0.312
Control vs DEN0.923
Control vs NIC0.078
Body wall contractionF(3,76) = 11.90, P < 0.0001Control vs CAF>0.999
Control vs DEN0.765
Control vs NIC<0.001
2C Mouth-hook contractionComparisons between tastantsOne-way ANOVAF(2,56) = 0.2104, P = 0.8109Dunnett's multiple comparison testControl vs SUC>0.999
Control vs FRU0.793
BendingKruskal–Wallis test0.9784, P = 0.6131Dunn's multiple comparison testControl vs SUC>0.05
Control vs FRU>0.05
Body wall contractionOne-way ANOVAF(2,56) = 0.1099, P = 0.8961Dunnett's multiple comparison testControl vs SUC0.990
Control vs FRU0.863
3A Comparisons between genotypesKruskal–Wallis test39.44, P < 0.0001Dunn's multiple comparison testUAS-Kir2.1/+ vs Gr33a>Kir2.1<0.05
Gr33a-GAL4/+ vs Gr33a>Kir2.1<0.05
UAS-Kir2.1/+ vs Gr39b>Kir2.1<0.05
Gr39b-GAL4/+ vs Gr39b>Kir2.1<0.01
UAS-Kir2.1/+ vs Gr23a>Kir2.1>0.05
Gr23a-GAL4/+ vs Gr23a>Kir2.1>0.05
UAS-Kir2.1/+ vs Gr22a>Kir2.1>0.05
Gr22a-GAL4/+ vs Gr22a>Kir2.1>0.05
UAS-Kir2.1/+ vs Gr36b>Kir2.1>0.05
Gr36b-GAL4/+ vs Gr36b>Kir2.1>0.05
3B Interaction between genotype and chemicalTwo-way ANOVAF(9,356) = 4.149, P < 0.0001Bonferroni's multiple comparison testControl vs 100 mM CAF (Gr33a-GAL4/+)<0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr33a>Kir2.1)<0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr39b-GAL4/+)<0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr39b>kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr23a-GAL4/+)<0.01
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr23a>kir2.1)<0.01
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22a-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22a>kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr36b-GAL4/+)<0.01
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr36b>kir2.1)>0.05
3C Interaction between genotype and chemicalTwo-way ANOVAF(9,356) = 1.837, P = 0.0606Bonferroni's multiple comparison testControl vs 100 mM CAF (Gr33a-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr33a>Kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr39b-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr39b>kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr23a-GAL4/+)<0.01
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr23a>kir2.1)<0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22a-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22a>kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr36b-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr36b>kir2.1)>0.05
4A Comparisons between genotypesOne-way ANOVAF(10,64) = 15.38, P < 0.0001Newman–Keuls multiple comparison testUAS-Gr33a/+ vs Gr33a>Gr33a<0.001
Gr33a-GAL4/+ vs Gr33a>Gr33a<0.001
UAS-Gr33a/+ vs Gr39b>Gr33a<0.001
Gr39b-GAL4/+ vs Gr39b>Gr33a<0.001
UAS-Gr33a/+ vs Gr22d>Gr33a<0.001
Gr22d-GAL4/+ vs Gr22d>Gr33a<0.001
UAS-Gr33a/+ vs Gr22a>Gr33a>0.05
Gr22a-GAL4/+ vs Gr22a>Gr33a>0.05
UAS-Gr33a/+ vs Gr36b>Gr33a>0.05
Gr36b-GAL4/+ vs Gr36b>Gr33a>0.05
4B Interaction between genotype and chemicalTwo-way ANOVAF(9,402) = 2.597, P = 0.0064Bonferroni's multiple comparison testControl vs 100 mM CAF (Gr33a-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr33a>Gr33a)<0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr39b-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr39b>Gr33a)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22d-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22d>Gr33a)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22a-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22a>Gr33a)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr36b-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr36b>Gr33a)>0.05
4C Interaction between genotype and chemicalTwo-way ANOVAF(9,402) = 2.084, P = 0.0299Bonferroni's multiple comparison testControl vs 100 mM CAF (Gr33a-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr33a>Gr33a)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr39b-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr39b>Gr33a)<0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22d-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22d>Gr33a)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22a-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22a>Gr33a)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr36b-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr36b>Gr33a)>0.05
5A Comparisons between genotypesOne-way ANOVAF(13,106) = 7.609, P < 0.0001Uncorrected Fisher's LSD testC7-GAL4/+ vs C7>Kir2.10.032
Gr22a-GAL4/+ vs Gr22a>Kir2.10.002
C7,Gr22a-GAL4/+ vs C7,Gr22a>kir2.10.001
Gr28b.e-GAL4/+ vs Gr28b.e>Kir2.10.005
C7,Gr28b.e-GAL4/+ vs C7,Gr28b.e>kir2.1<0.001
Gr59c-GAL4/+ vs Gr59c>Kir2.10.368
C7,Gr59c-GAL4/+ vs C7,Gr59c>kir2.1<0.001
C7>Kir2.1 vs C7,Gr22a>Kir2.10.019
Gr22a>Kir2.1 vs C7,Gr22a>Kir2.10.002
C7>Kir2.1 vs C7,Gr28b.e>Kir2.10.044
Gr28b.e>Kir2.1 vs C7,Gr28b.e>Kir2.10.012
C7>Kir2.1 vs C7,Gr59c>Kir2.10.245
Gr59c>Kir2.1 vs C7,Gr59c>Kir2.10.018
5B Interaction between genotype and chemicalTwo-way ANOVAF(13,521) = 0.7760, P = 0.6860Bonferroni's multiple comparison testControl vs 100 mM CAF (C7-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (C7>Kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22a-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22a>Kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22a,C7-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22a,C7>Kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr28b.e-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr28b.e>Kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr28b.e,C7-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr28b.e,C7>Kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr59c-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr59c>Kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr59c,C7-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr59c,C7>Kir2.1)>0.05
5C Interaction between genotype and chemicalTwo-way ANOVAF(13,521) = 1.619, P = 0.0761Bonferroni's multiple comparison testControl vs 100 mM CAF (C7-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (C7>Kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22a-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22a>Kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22a,C7-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr22a,C7>Kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr28b.e-GAL4/+)<0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr28b.e>Kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr28b.e,C7-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr28b.e,C7>Kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr59c-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr59c>Kir2.1)>0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr59c,C7-GAL4/+)<0.05
Control vs 100 mM CAF (Gr59c,C7>Kir2.1)>0.05
5F Comparisons between tastantsMann–Whitney U testWater vs 10 mM denatonium (Gr59c>GCaMP6m)0.009
Water vs 10 mM denatonium (C7>GCaMP6m)0.013
6A Comparisons between genotypesOne-way ANOVAF(4,35) = 10.73, P < 0.0001Newman–Keuls multiple comparison testUAS-Gr59c/+ vs Gr22d>Gr59c<0.01
Gr22d-GAL4 vs Gr22d>Gr59c<0.01
UAS-Gr59c/+ vs Gr39b>Gr59c<0.001
Gr39b-GAL4 vs Gr39b>Gr59c<0.01
6B Interaction between genotype and chemicalTwo-way ANOVAF(4,182) = 6.100, P = 0.0001Bonferroni's multiple comparison testControl vs 10 mM denatonium (UAS-Gr59c/+)>0.05
Control vs 10 mM denatonium (Gr22d-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 10 mM denatonium (Gr22d>Gr59c)<0.001
Control vs 10 mM denatonium (Gr39b-GAL4/+)>0.05
Control vs 10 mM denatonium (Gr39b>Gr59c)<0.001
6E Comparisons between tastantsMann–Whitney U testWater vs 10 mM denatonium (Gr39b>GCaMP6m)>0.05
Water vs 10 mM denatonium (Gr39b>Gr59c,GCaMP6m)<0.01