Table 1

Statistical analyses in Figures 14

LocationData structureType of testCI/powerP valueComparison
1A Normally distributedTwo-way ANOVA–21.49 to –13.89<0.0001Cell viability after MPP+ treatment
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–38.98 to –11.11<0.0001Ubc9-OE 160 vs EGFP 160
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–43.29 to –15.41<0.0001Ubc9-OE 320 vs EGFP 320
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–33.00 to –5.1300.0012Ubc9-OE 640 vs EGFP 640
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–28.93 to –1.0550.0251Ubc9-OE 1280 vs EGFP 1280
1B Normally distributedTwo-way ANOVA10.85 to 24.22<0.0001Cytotoxicity after MPP+ treatment
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–21.26 to 27.73>0.9999Ubc9-OE 160 vs EGFP 160
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc26.41 to 75.40<0.0001Ubc9-OE 320 vs EGFP 320
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc16.59 to 65.58<0.0001Ubc9-OE 640 vs EGFP 640
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–32.05 to 16.940.9909Ubc9-OE 1280 vs EGFP 1280
1C Normally distributedTwo-way ANOVA13.94 to 24.490.1975Cell viability after RNAi and MPP+ treatment
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc4.795 to 43.660.005Ubc9-OE 320 vs EGFP 320
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc10.08 to 48.950.0003Ubc9-OE 640 vs EGFP 640
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc4.632 to 43.500.0054Ubc9-OE 1280 vs EGFP 1280
1D Normally distributedTwo-way ANOVA–232.5 to –145.8<0.0001Cytotoxicity after RNAi and MPP+ treatment
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–345.3 to –25.870.0115Ubc9-OE 320 vs EGFP 320
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–391.8 to –72.350.0006Ubc9-OE 640 vs EGFP 640
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–634.4 to –314.9<0.0001Ubc9-OE 1280 vs EGFP 1280
1E Normally distributedTwo-way ANOVA–12.63 to –4.563<0.0001Cell viability after PFF treatment
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–23.71 to –2.9910.0041Ubc9-OE WGA/Glu vs EGFP WGA/Glu
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–22.63 to –2.2550.0077Ubc9-OE PFF vs EGFP PFF
1F Normally distributedTwo-way ANOVA28.05 to 35.19<0.0001Cytotoxicity after PFF treatment
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc23.77 to 41.890.0001Ubc9-OE WGA/Glu vs EGFP WGA/Glu
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc52.98 to 71.09<0.0001Ubc9-OE PFF vs EGFP PFF
1G Normally distributedTwo-way ANOVA4.118 to 18.39<0.0001Cell viability after Ubc9-RNAi knockdown
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–20.35 to 16.000.9993Ubc9-RNAi WGA/Glu vs NC1 WGA/Glu
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc16.56 to 52.91<0.0001Ubc9-RNAi PFF vs NC1 PFF
1H Normally distributedTwo-way ANOVA–55.73 to –27.400.0005Cytotoxicity after Ubc9-RNAi knockdown
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–69.11 to 3.0380.0914Ubc9-RNAi WGA/Glu vs NC1 WGA/Glu
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–117.0 to –44.85<0.0001Ubc9-RNAi PFF vs NC1 PFF
2B Normally distributedTwo-way ANOVA312.0 to 507.6<0.0001ROS level after MPP+ treatment
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–1460 to –1091<0.0001EGFP V vs EGFP MPP+
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–592.4 to –222.70.0025Ubc9-OE V vs Ubc9-OE MPP+
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc659.0 to 1029<0.0001EGFP MPP+ vs Ubc9-OE MPP+
2D Normally distributedTwo-way ANOVA–434.9 to –212.10.0017ROS levels after RNAi and MPP+ treatment
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–414.7 to –124.70.001NC1 V vs NC1 MPP+
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–827.0 to –417.7<0.0001Ubc9-RNAi V vs Ubc9-RNAi MPP+
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–708.2 to –304.40.0001NC1 MPP+ vs Ubc9-RNAi MPP+
2F Normally distributedTwo-way ANOVA–465.1 to –244.0<0.0001ROS level after MPP+ treatment
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–803.4 to –479.8<0.0001EGFP WGA/Glu vs EGFP PFF
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc238.0 to 654.2<0.0001EGFP PFF vs Ubc9-OE PFF
2H Normally distributedTwo-way ANOVA–789.3 to –556.9<0.0001ROS levels after RNAi and PFF treatment
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–510.4 to –79.650.0042NC1 WGA/Glu vs NC1 PFF
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–1273 to –829.1<0.0001NC1 PFF vs Ubc9-RNAi PFF
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–1062 to –631.3<0.0001Ubc9-RNAi WGA/Glu vs Ubc9-RNAi PFF
3B Normally distributedTwo-way ANOVA–151.0 to –87.730.0039ThioflavinT staining after PFF treatment
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–203.5 to –53.90<0.0001NC1 WGA/Glu vs NC1 PFF
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–219.6 to –67.66<0.0001NC1 PFF vs Ubc9-RNAi PFF
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–231.4 to –100.4<0.0001Ubc9-RNAi WGA/Glu vs Ubc9-RNAi PFF
3C Normally distributedTwo-way ANOVA–34.85 to –5.6850.0011α-Syn staining after PFF treatment
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–45.05 to 36.340.9996NC1 WGA/Glu vs NC1 PFF
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–92.75 to –21.750.0001NC1 PFF vs Ubc9-RNAi PFF
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–94.52 to –22.600.0001Ubc9-RNAi WGA/Glu vs Ubc9-RNAi PFF
4B Normally distributedTwo-way ANOVA–25.95 to –8.554<0.0001TH staining in striatum
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc43.82 to 76.84<0.0001Saline WT vs MPTP WT
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc37.62 to 70.64<0.0001Saline Ubc9-OE vs MPTP WT
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–55.78 to –25.640.0001MPTP WT vs MPTP Ubc9-OE
4C Normally distributedTwo-way ANOVA–1522 to –383.40.0082TH positive cells in substantia nigra
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc1002 to 31630.0021Saline WT vs MPTP WT
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc1154 to 33150.0002Saline Ubc9-OE vs MPTP WT
Normally distributedTukey's post hoc–2741 to –767.70.0040MPTP WT vs MPTP Ubc9-OE