Figure | Comparison | Data Structure (Shapiro–Wilk normality test unless otherwise stated) | Type of test | Statistic | Confidence, 95% CI | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

a1 | 1Bi | WT vs Panx1 KO | Normal distribution | Unpaired two-tailed t test | t = 4.051; df = 13 | p = 0.0014; 1.667 to 5.476 |

a2 | 1Bi | WT vs Panx1 KO | Normal distribution (D’Agostino-Pearson Normality Test chosen because of multiple identical values) | Unpaired two-tailed t test | i = 4.374; df = 39 | p < 0.0001; 1.894 to 5.153 |

b1 | 1Ci | WT vs Panx1 KO | Normal distribution (D’Agostino-Pearson Normality Test chosen because of multiple identical values) | Unpaired two-tailed t test | t = 2.844; df = 39 | p = 0.0071; 0.4654 to 2.758 |

b2 | 1Ci | WT vs Panx1 KO | Normal distribution | Unpaired two-tailed t test | t = 1.320; df = 30 | p = 0.1968; −0.3101 to 1.443 |

c | 1D | WT vs Panx1 KO | Not normal (p < 0.0001) | Mann-Whitney U test (two-tailed) | U = 316,969 | p < 0.0001, 834622, 1.384e6 |

d | 1E | WT vs Panx1 KO | Not normal (p < 0.0001) | Mann-Whitney U test (two-tailed) | U = 294,294 | p < 0.0001; 811947, 1.407e6 |

e1 | 1Fii | WT vs Panx1 KO, interaction effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(2, 90)} = 3.475 | p = 0.0352 |

e2 | 1Fii | WT vs Panx1 KO, cell-type effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(2, 90)} = 2615 | p < 0.0001 |

e3 | 1Fii | WT vs Panx1 KO, genotype effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 90)} = 4.934e-008 | p = 0.9998 |

e4 | 1Fii | WT vs Panx1 KO, excitatory neurons | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.9702, −2.347 to 5.568 | |

e5 | 1Fii | WT vs Panx1 KO, inhibitory neurons | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.7500, −2.079 to 5.835 | |

e6 | 1Fii | WT vs Panx1 KO, astrocytes | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.1026, −7.445 to 0.4690 | |

e7 | 1Fii | WT vs Panx1 KO | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} | F_{(5, 90)} = 1047 | p < 0.0001 |

e8 | 1Fii | WT vs Panx1 KO, excitatory neurons | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.9702, −2.347 to 5.568 | |

e9 | 1Fii | WT vs Panx1 KO, inhibitory neurons | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.7500, −2.079 to 5.835 | |

e10 | 1Fii | WT vs Panx1 KO, astrocytes | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.1026, −7.445 to 0.4690 | |

f | 1G | WT vs Panx1 KO Formazan absorbance (MTT conversion to formazan) | Normal distribution | Unpaired two-tailed t test | t = 0.128 df = 4 | p = 0.9089, −25.76 to 23.59 |

g1 | 2Aiii | PSD-95 and Panx1 expression in Homogenate (H) vs Synaptosome (P3) content interaction | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 8)} = 9.847 | p = 0.0138 |

g2 | 2Aiii | PSD-95 and Panx1 expression effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 8)} = 9.847 | p = 0.0138 |

g3 | 2Aiii | H vs P3 content effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 8)} = 74.46 | p < 0.0001 |

g4 | 2Aiii | PSD-95 expression in H vs P3 | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p < 0.0001; −358.0 to −180.1 | |

g5 | 2Aiii | Panx1 expression in H vs P3 | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.0093; −214.5 to −36.58 | |

g6 | 2Aiii | PSD-95 and Panx1 expression in H vs P3 | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} | F_{(3, 8)} = 31.38 | p < 0.0001 |

g7 | 2Aiii | Panx1 expression in H vs P3 | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} with Bonferroni’s correction | p < 0.0001; −214.5 to −36.58 | |

g8 | 2Aiii | PSD-95 and Panx1 expression in H and P3 | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.0093; −358.0 to −180.1 | |

h1 | 2Biii | Panx1 expression P7–P63 | Normal distribution | One-way ANOVA | F_{(3, 8)} = 365.9 | p < 0.0001 |

h2 | 2Biii | Panx1 expression P7–P14 | Normal distribution | One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p < 0.0001; 0.6377 to 0.8563 | |

h3 | 2Biii | Panx1 expression P14-P29 | Normal distribution | One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.0006; 0.1161 to 0.3218 | |

h4 | 2Biii | Panx1 expression P29–P63 | Normal distribution | One-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.9604; −0.08815 to 0.1304 | |

i1 | 3B | Panx1 expression WT vs KO (genotype) by age interaction | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 84.46 | p < 0.0001 |

i2 | 3B | Genotype effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 144.7 | p < 0.0001 |

i3 | 3B | Age effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 84.46 | p < 0.0001 |

i4 | 3B | Panx1 expression WT P14 vs WT P29 | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p < 0.0001;70.14 to 103.1 | |

i5 | 3B | Panx1 expression KO P14 vs KO P29 | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p = > 0.9999; −16.48 to 16.48 | |

i6 | 3B | Panx1 expression WT P14–P29 and KO P14–P29 | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} | F_{(3, 16)} = 104.5 | p < 0.0001 |

i7 | 3B | Panx1 expression WT P14 vs WT P29 | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} with Bonferroni’s correction | p < 0.0001, 67.87 to 105.4 | |

i8 | 3B | Panx1 expression WT P14 % KO 14 | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} with Bonferroni’s correction | p < 0.0001; 81.25 to 118.7 | |

i9 | 3B | Panx1 expression WT 29 vs KO P29 | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.2476; −5.369 to 32.13 | |

i10 | 3B | Panx1 expression KO P14 vs KO P29 | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} with Bonferroni’s correction | p > 0.9999; −18.75 to 18.75 | |

j1 | 3B | PSD-95 expression WT vs KO (genotype) by age interaction | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 4.208 | p = 0.0570 |

j2 | 3B | Genotype effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 37.42 | p < 0.0001 |

j3 | 3B | Age effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 175.8 | p < 0.0001 |

j4 | 3B | PSD-95, WT P14 vs KO P14 | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p < 0.0001; −113.1 to −45.30 | |

j5 | 3B | PSD-95, WT P29 vs KO P29 | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.0220; −73.34 to −5.516 | |

k1 | 3B | GluA1 expression WT vs KO (genotype) by age interaction | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 0.1996 | p = 0.6611 |

k2 | 3B | Genotype effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 9.090 | p = 0.0082 |

k3 | 3B | Age effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 0.02040 | p = 0.8882 |

k4 | 3B | GluA1, WT P14 vs KO P14 | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.1763; −131.3 to 20.11 | |

k5 | 3B | GluA1, WT P29 vs KO P29 | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.0526; −150.6 to 0.7678 | |

l1 | 3B | GluA2 expression WT vs KO (genotype) by age interaction | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 1.156 | p = 0.2982 |

l2 | 3B | Genotype effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 0.5621 | p = 0.4643 |

l3 | 3B | Age effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 0.1894 | p = 0.6693 |

m1 | 3B | GluN1 expression WT vs KO (genotype) by age interaction | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 4.900 | p = 0.0417 |

m2 | 3B | Genotype effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 0.05221 | p = 0.8222 |

m3 | 3B | Age effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 19.95 | p = 0.0004 |

m4 | 3B | GluN1, WT P14 vs KO P14 | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.3590; −22.63 to 6.241 | |

m5 | 3B | GluN1, WT P29 vs KO P29 | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.2069; −4.355 to 24.52 | |

m6 | 3B | GluN1 expression WT P14–P29 and KO P14–P29 | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} | F_{(3, 16)} = 8.300 | p = 0.0015 |

m7 | 3B | GluN1 expression WT P14–P29 | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.0009; −43.99 to −11.15 | |

m8 | 3B | GluN1 expression KO P14–P29 | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.5231; −25.72 to 7.123 | |

m9 | 3B | GluN1 expression WT vs KO, P14 | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.7180, −24.62 to 8.227 | |

m10 | 3B | GluN1 expression WT vs KO, P29 | Normal distribution | Simple effect ANOVA^{a} with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.4138, −6.341 to 26.50 | |

n1 | 3B | GluN2A expression WT vs KO (genotype) by age interaction | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 0.05302 | p = 0.8208 |

n2 | 3B | Genotype effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 7.892 | p = 0.0126 |

n3 | 3B | Age effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 1.092 | p = 0.3115 |

n4 | 3B | GluN2A, WT P14 vs KO P14 | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.1739; −159.7 to 24.14 | |

n5 | 3B | GluN2A, WT P29 vs KO P29 | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.0945; −171.8 to 12.03 | |

o1 | 3B | GluN2B expression WT vs KO (genotype) by age interaction | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 3.507 | p = 0.0795 |

o2 | 3B | Genotype effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 1.219 | p = 0.2859 |

o3 | 3B | Age effect | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA | F_{(1, 16)} = 4.547 | p = 0.0488 |

o4 | 3B | GluN2B, WT P14 vs WT P29 | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p > 0.9999; −35.97 to 41.75 | |

o5 | 3B | GluN2B, KO P14 vs KO P29 | Normal distribution | Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s correction | p = 0.0240; 5.644 to 83.37 | |

p1 | 4Bi | Spine density WT P14 vs KO P14 | Normal distribution | Unpaired two-tailed t test | t = 3.962; df = 14 | p = 0.0014; −5.368 to −1.597 |

p2 | 4Bi | Spine length WT P14 vs KO P14 | Normal distribution | Unpaired two-tailed t test | t = 0.8432; df = 14 | p = 0.4133; −0.09070 to 0.2082 |

p3 | 4Bi | Spine head diameter WT P14 vs KO P14, total distribution | Not normal | Mann-Whitney U test (two-tailed) | U = 1.474e^{7} | p = 0.0131 |

p4 | 4Bi | Spine head diameter WT P14 vs KO P14, 25% right tail (> percentile 75) | Not normal | Mann-Whitney U test (two-tailed) | U = 931,253 | p = 0.4022. |

q1 | 4Bi | Spine density WT P29 vs KO P29 | Normal distribution | Unpaired two-tailed t test | t = 5.754; df = 12 | p < 0.0001; 3.279 to 7.275 |

q2 | 4Biii | Spine lengthWT P29 vs KO P29 | Normal distribution | Unpaired two-tailed t test | t = 0.8214; df = 12 | p = 0.4274; −0.05194 to 0.1148 |

r1 | 4Biii | Spine densityPanx1^{f/f} vs Panx1 cKO^{E}
| Normal distribution | Unpaired two-tailed t test | t = 4.548; df = 4 | p = 0.0104; 2.767 to 11.44 |

r2 | 4Cii | Spine length Panx1^{f/f} vs Panx1 cKO^{E} | Normal distribution | Unpaired two-tailed t test | t = 0.8717; df = 4 | p = 0.4326; −0.1602 to 0.3069 |

s1 | 4Cii | Spine density WT vs KO primary cortical neurons | Normal distribution (D’Agostino-Pearson Normality Test chosen due to multiple identical values) | Unpaired two-tailed t test | t = 8.336; df = 25 | p < 0.0001;4.482 to 7.424 |

s2 | 4Cii | PSD-95+ spines WT vs KO primary cortical neurons | Normal distribution (D’Agostino-Pearson Normality Test chosen due to multiple identical values) | Unpaired two-tailed t test | t = 4.243; df = 25 | p = 0.0003; 1.220 to 3.521 |

s3 | 4Cii | Spine Length WT vs KO primary cortical neurons | Normal distribution | Unpaired two-tailed t test | t = 1.302; df = 25 | p = 0.2047; −0.4186 to 0.09428 |

↵a Group analyses were performed using two-way ANOVAs. When interactions were significant, a one-way ANOVA with Bonferroni’s multiple-comparison’s test correction was performed to evaluate simple effects (McDonald, 2014).