Statistical analyses in Figures 5-9 and Extended Data Figure 1-1
Location | Data structure | Type of test | CI/power | P value | Comparison |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
5B | Normally distributed | Unpaired t test | 10.63 to 87.29 | 0.0142 | EGFP vs Ubc9-OE |
5E | Normally distributed | One-way ANOVA | 0.8219 | <0.0001 | Ubc9 expression levels |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –41.45 to –4.625 | 0.012 | EGFP vs Ubc9-OE | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | 12.86 to 49.68 | 0.0009 | EGFP vs Ubc9-RNAi | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | 35.89 to 72.71 | <0.0001 | Ubc9-OE vs Ubc9-RNAi | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –39.38 to –2.560 | 0.0229 | Ubc9-RNAi vs NC1 | |
5F | Normally distributed | One-way ANOVA | 0.7241 | 0.0001 | α-Syn expression levels |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –42.22 to –6.078 | 0.025 | EGFP vs Ubc9-OE | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | 4.374 to 40.51 | 0.0117 | EGFP vs Ubc9-RNAi | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | 28.52 to 64.66 | 0.0001 | Ubc9-OE vs Ubc9-RNAi | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –37.82 to –1.682 | 0.029 | Ubc9-RNAi vs NC1 | |
6B | Normally distributed | Two-way ANOVA | –35.37 to –27.83 | <0.0001 | Chx chase study at diff concentration |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –41.70 to –17.93 | 0.0135 | Ubc9-OE 100 vs EGFP 100 | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –56.70 to –32.92 | 0.0001 | Ubc9-OE 150 vs EGFP 150 | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –63.67 to –39.89 | <0.0001 | Ubc9-OE 200 vs EGFP 200 | |
6D | Normally distributed | Two-way ANOVA | –22.99 to –11.24 | <0.0001 | Chx chase study at diff time point |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –52.30 to –8.994 | 0.0008 | Ubc9-OE 18h vs EGFP 18h | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –68.64 to –25.34 | <0.0001 | Ubc9-OE 24h vs EGFP 24h | |
7B | Normally distributed | Two-way ANOVA | –34.53 to –16.53 | 0.0002 | MG132-mediated proteasomal inhibition |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | 25.60 to 86.88 | <0.0001 | EGFP Veh vs EGFP Chx | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –88.91 to –25.97 | 0.0001 | EGFP Chx vs Ubc9-OE Chx | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –68.03 to –5.097 | 0.0343 | EGFP Chx vs EGFP Chx+MG132 | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –62.93 to –7.299 | 0.0111 | EGFP Chx+MG132 vs Ubc9 Chx+MG132 | |
8B | Normally distributed | Two-way ANOVA | –24.40 to –19.50 | <0.0001 | PMA chase study |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –25.64 to –5.157 | 0.0012 | EGFP 4μM vs Ubc9-OE 4μM | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –41.26 to –20.77 | 0.0001 | EGFP 6μM vs Ubc9-OE 6μM | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –46.18 to –25.69 | <0.0001 | EGFP 8μM vs Ubc9-OE 8μM | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –59.03 to –38.55 | <0.0001 | EGFP 10μM vs Ubc9-OE μM | |
8D | Normally distributed | Two-way ANOVA | –17.12 to –1.028 | 0.0009 | Effect of PMA on protein degradation |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | 16.06 to 81.81 | 0.0002 | EGFP C vs EGFP PMA | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –76.68 to –15.19 | 0.0002 | EGFP PMA vs Ubc9-OE PMA | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –73.98 to –8.239 | 0.0031 | EGFP PMA vs EGFP Cqn+PMA | |
9B | Normally distributed | Two-way ANOVA | 0.81 | <0.0001 | SUMO1 level in total lysate |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | 15.06 to 58.91 | 0.001 | EGFP vs EGFP MPP+ | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –43.90 to –0.05988 | 0.0493 | EGFP vs Ubc9 | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –69.67 to –25.83 | <0.0001 | EGFP MPP+ vs Ubc9 MPP+ | |
9D | Normally distributed | Two-way ANOVA | 0.81 | <0.0001 | SUMO1 level in α-syn IP'ed samples |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | 7.692 to 65.01 | 0.0011 | EGFP vs EGFP MPP+ | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –62.93 to –5.610 | 0.0166 | EGFP vs Ubc9 | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –99.03 to –41.72 | <0.0001 | EGFP MPP+ vs Ubc9 MPP+ | |
9F | Normally distributed | Two-way ANOVA | 0.62 | 0.0002 | Ubiquitin level in total lysate |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | 1.485 to 57.87 | 0.0034 | EGFP vs EGFP MPP+ | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –52.79 to 3.595 | 0.0369 | EGFP vs Ubc9 | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | 12.41 to 68.79 | 0.0036 | Ubc9 vs Ubc9 MPP+ | |
9H | Normally distributed | Two-way ANOVA | 0.72 | <0.0001 | Ubiquitin level in α-syn IP'ed samples |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | 19.70 to 63.21 | 0.0081 | EGFP vs EGFP MPP+ | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –84.50 to –19.32 | 0.0013 | EGFP vs Ubc9 | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | –74.35 to –9.169 | 0.0092 | EGFP MPP+ vs Ubc9 MPP+ | |
Normally distributed | Tukey's post hoc | 8.176 to 73.36 | 0.0111 | Ubc9 vs Ubc9 MPP+ | |
1-1A | Normally distributed | One-way ANOVA | 0.81 | <0.0001 | Effect of PFF on cell viability |
Normally distributed | Dunnett's post hoc | 25.90 to 47.02 | <0.0001 | Vehicle vs PFF 1μg | |
Normally distributed | Dunnett's post hoc | 29.84 to 50.96 | <0.0001 | Vehicle vs PFF 2μg | |
Normally distributed | Dunnett's post hoc | 37.21 to 55.50 | <0.0001 | Vehicle vs PFF 3μg | |
Normally distributed | Dunnett's post hoc | 44.66 to 65.78 | <0.0001 | Vehicle vs PFF 4μg | |
Normally distributed | Dunnett's post hoc | 41.98 to 60.27 | <0.0001 | Vehicle vs PFF 5μg | |
1-1B | Normally distributed | One-way ANOVA | 0.78 | <0.0001 | Effect of PFF on cytotoxicity |
Normally distributed | Dunnett's post hoc | –35.37 to –11.32 | <0.0001 | Vehicle vs PFF 1μg | |
Normally distributed | Dunnett's post hoc | –37.83 to –13.78 | <0.0001 | Vehicle vs PFF 2μg | |
Normally distributed | Dunnett's post hoc | –50.65 to –29.82 | <0.0001 | Vehicle vs PFF 3μg | |
Normally distributed | Dunnett's post hoc | –63.02 to –38.97 | <0.0001 | Vehicle vs PFF 4μg | |
Normally distributed | Dunnett's post hoc | –61.21 to –40.38 | <0.0001 | Vehicle vs PFF 5μg |