Figure | Data structure | Statistical test | Sample size | Statistical data |
---|---|---|---|---|

Figure 1B, metabolic labelling of protein synthesis with 50 μM lovastatin/vehicle | ||||

Normally distributed | Two-way RM ANOVA | N = 12per group | Genotype: p = 0.0106 | |

WT veh vs Fmr1 KO veh | Normally distributed | Sidak’s post hoc | N = 12per group | CI: –0.2916 to –0.06786, p = 0.0032 |

WT 50 μM lovastatin vs Fmr1 KO 50 μM lovastatin | Normally distributed | Sidak’s post hoc | N = 12per group | CI: –0.1716 to 0.05214, p = 0.3516 |

Fmr1 KO vehicle vs Fmr1 KO 50 μM lovastatin | Normally distributed | Sidak’s post hoc | N = 12per group | CI: 0.007476 to 0.2312, p = 0.0368 |

Figure 1C, metabolic labelling of protein synthesis with 1–5 μM simvastatin/vehicle | ||||

Normally distributed | Two-way RM ANOVA | N = 10per group | Treatment:p < 0.0001, genotype: p = 0.0294 | |

WT veh vs KO veh | Normally distributed | Sidak’s post hoc | N = 10per group | CI: –0.3188 to 0.09835, p = 0.3451 |

WT veh vs KO veh | Normally distributed | Paired t test | N = 10per group | CI: 0.008558 to 0.2119, p = 0.0366 |

WT veh vs WT 5 μM simvastatin | Normally distributed | Sidak’s post hoc | N = 10per group | CI: –0.7435 to –0.3263, p = 0.0001 |

Fmr1 KO veh vs Fmr1 KO 5 μM simvastatin | Normally distributed | Sidak’s post hoc | N = 10per group | CI: –0.8045 to –0.3873, p < 0.0001 |

Figure 1D, metabolic labelling of protein synthesis with 0.1–0.5 μM simvastatin/vehicle | ||||

Normally distributed | Two-way RM ANOVA | N = 9per group | Treatment: p < 0.0001, genotype: p = 0.0068 | |

WT veh vs Fmr1 KO veh | Normally distributed | Sidak’s post hoc | N = 9per group | CI: –0.2483 to –0.06400, p = 0.0005 |

WT veh vs WT 0.3 μM simvastatin | Normally distributed | Sidak’s post hoc | N = 9per group | CI: –0.2760 to –0.07980, p = 0.0002 |

WT veh vs WT 0.5 μM simvastatin | Normally distributed | Sidak’s post hoc | N = 9per group | CI: –0.3394 to –0.1432,p < 0.0001 |

Fmr1 KO veh vs Fmr1 KO 0.3 μM simvastatin | Normally distributed | Sidak’s post hoc | N = 9per group | CI: –0.2334 to –0.03724,p = 0.0035 |

Fmr1 KO veh vs Fmr1 KO 0.5 μM simvastatin | Normally distributed | Sidak’s post hoc | N = 9per group | CI: –0.3121 to –0.1159,p < 0.0001 |

WT 0.1 μM simvastatin vs Fmr1 KO 0.1 μM simvastatin | Normally distributed | Sidak’s post hoc | N = 9per group | CI: –0.1874 to –0.003152,p = 0.0406 |

WT 0.3 μM simvastatin vs Fmr1 KO 0.3 μM simvastatin | Normally distributed | Sidak’s post hoc | N = 9per group | CI: –0.2057 to –0.02143,p = 0.0115 |

WT 0.5 μM simvastatin vs Fmr1 KO 0.5 μM simvastatin | Normally distributed | Sidak’s post hoc | N = 9per group | CI: –0.2210 to –0.03669,p = 0.0038 |

Figure 2B, phospho/total ERK1/2 with 50 μM lovastatin/vehicle | ||||

Normally distributed | Two-way RM ANOVA | N = 19per group | Genotype: p = 0.0146 | |

(Continued) | ||||

WT veh vs Fmr1 KO veh | Normally distributed | Sidak’s post hoc | N = 19per group | CI: –0.02577 to 0.1893,p = 0.1539 |

Fmr1 KO veh vs Fmr1 KO lovastatin | Normally distributed | Sidak’s post hoc | N = 19per group | CI: 0.04797 to 0.2630,p = 0.0048 |

Figure 2C, phospho/total ERK1/2 with 0.1–0.5 μM simvastatin/vehicle | ||||

Normally distributed | Two-way RM ANOVA | N = 11per group | Genotype: p = 0.7010, treatment: p = 0.8761 | |

Figure 2D, phospho/total p70S6K with 0.1–0.5 μM simvastatin/vehicle | ||||

Normally distributed | Two-way RM ANOVA | N = 10per group | Genotype: p = 0.2860, treatment: p = 0.6206 | |

Figure 3B, AGS incidence with 3 mg/kg simvastatin | ||||

WT veh vs Fmr1 KO veh | Non-normal distribution | Two-tailed Fisher’s exact test | N = 12per group | CI: 0.002672 to 0.3437, p = 0.0028 |

WT simvastatin vs Fmr1 KO simvastatin | Non-normal distribution | Two-tailed Fisher’s exact test | N = 12per group | CI: 0.002918 to 0.3808, p = 0.0028 |

Fmr1 KO veh vs Fmr1 KO simvastatin | Non-normal distribution | Two-tailed Fisher’s exact test | N = 12per group | CI: 0.1915 to 5.221, p > 0.9999 |

Figure 3C, AGS severity distribution scores with 3 mg/kg simvastatin | ||||

WT veh vs Fmr1 KO veh | Non-normal distribution | Mann–Whitney test | N = 12per group | CI: 0.000 to 2.000, p = 0.0028 |

Fmr1 KO veh vs Fmr1 KO simvastatin | Non-normal distribution | Mann–Whitney test | N = 12per group | CI: –1.000 to 1.000, p = 0.9510 |

Figure 3D, AGS latency with 3 mg/kg simvastatin | ||||

Fmr1 KO veh vs Fmr1 KO simvastatin | Normally distributed | Unpaired two-tailed t test | N = 12per group | CI: –11.56 to 43.11,p = 0.2388 |

Figure 3E, AGS incidence with 50 mg/kg simvastatin | ||||

WT veh vs Fmr1 KO veh | Non-normal distribution | Two-tailed Fisher’s exact test | KO veh: n = 14WT veh: n = 12 | CI: 0.004960 to 0.5143, p = 0.0053 |

WT simvastatin vs Fmr1 KO simvastatin | Non-normal distribution | Two-tailed Fisher’s exact test | KO simva: n = 11WT simva:n = 13 | CI: 0.006556 to 0.7356, p = 0.0233 |

Fmr1 KO veh vs Fmr1 KO simvastatin | Non-normal distribution | Two-tailed Fisher’s exact test | KO veh: n = 14 KO simva: n = 11 | CI: 0.2988 to 7.531, p = 0.6968 |

Figure 3F, AGS severity scores with 50 mg/kg simvastatin | ||||

WT veh vs Fmr1 KO veh | Non-normal distribution | Mann–Whitney test | KO veh: n = 14WT veh: n = 12 | CI: 0.000 to 3.000, p = 0.0036 |

Fmr1 KO veh vs Fmr1 KO simvastatin | Non-normal distribution | Mann–Whitney test | KO veh: n = 14 KO simva: n = 11 | CI: –3.000 to 0.000, p = 0.2254 |

Figure 3G, AGS latency with 50 mg/kg simvastatin | ||||

Fmr1 KO veh vs Fmr1 KO simvastatin | Normally distributed | Unpaired two-tailed t test | KO veh: n = 14 KO simva: n = 11 | CI: –11.41 to 8.739,p = 0.7794 |

Figure 3H, AGS incidence with 100 mg/kg lovastatin | ||||

WT veh vs Fmr1 KO veh | Non-normal distribution | Two-tailed Fisher’s exact test | KO veh: n = 16WT veh: n = 15 | CI: 0.01126 to 0.4341, p = 0.0032 |

WT lovastatin vs Fmr1 KO lovastatin | Non-normal distribution | Two-tailed Fisher’s exact test | KO lova: n = 14WT lova:n = 17 | CI: 0.06948 to 3.440, p = 0.6358 |

(Continued) | ||||

Fmr1 KO veh vs Fmr1 KO lovastatin | Non-normal distribution | Two-tailed Fisher’s exact test | KO veh: n = 16 KO lova: n = 14 | CI: 1.538 to 42.32, p = 0.0136 |

Figure 3I, AGS severity distribution scores with 100 mg/kg lovastatin | ||||

WT veh vs Fmr1 KO veh | Non-normal distribution | Mann–Whitney test | KO veh: n = 16n = WT veh: n = 15 | CI: 0.000 to 3.000, p = 0.0064 |

Fmr1 KO veh vs Fmr1 KO lovastatin | Non-normal distribution | Mann–Whitney test | KO veh: n = 16 KO lova: n = 14 | CI: –3.000 to 0.000, p = 0.0204 |

Figure 3J, AGS latency with 100 mg/kg lovastatin | ||||

Fmr1 KO veh vs Fmr1 KO simvastatin | Normally distributed | Unpaired two-tailed t test | KO veh: n = 16 KO lova: n = 14 | CI: 3.595 to 31.07,p = 0.0176 |