(Fig. 2A, top) IB pull-down α | GST-Arc(WT) vs GST | Two-factor, mean | t test | 3/3 | < 0.0001 |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(W197A) | Two-factor, mean | t test | 3/3 | < 0.0001 |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(195-199A) | Two-factor, mean | t test | 3/3 | < 0.0001 | |
(Fig. 2A, middle) IB pull-down µ2 | GST vs GST-Arc(WT) | Two-factor, mean | t test | 3/3 | < 0.0001 |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(W197A) | Two-factor, mean | t test | 3/3 | 0.0007 |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(195-199A) | Two-factor, mean | t test | 3/3 | 0.0039 | |
(Fig. 2B) IB pull-down dyn2-GFP | GST-Arc(WT) vs GST | Two-factor, mean | t test | 3/3 | < 0.0001 |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(W197A) | Two-factor, mean | t test | 3/3 | 0.0159 | |
(Fig. 2C) IB pull-down GFP-Triad3A | GST-Arc(WT) vs GST | Two-factor, mean | t test | 3/3 | < 0.0001 |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(W197A) | Two-factor, mean | t test | 3/3 | 0.0055 |
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(195-199A) | Two-factor, mean | t test | 3/3 | 0.0055 | |
(Fig. 3A) IB Surface GluA1 | pCIneo vs pArc(WT) | Two-factor, mean | ANOVA Tukey’s | 3/3 | 0.1284 |
pCIneo vs pArc(W197A) | Two-factor, mean | ANOVA Tukey’s | 4/4 | 0.5543 | |
(Fig. 3B) IB Surface GluA2 | pCIneo vs pArc(WT) | Two-factor, mean | ANOVA Tukey’s | 4/4 | >0.9999 |
pCIneo vs pArc(W197A) | Two-factor, mean | ANOVA Tukey’s | 4/4 | 0.9637 | |
(Fig. 3B) IB Surface EGFR | pCIneo vs pArc(WT) | Two-factor, mean | ANOVA Tukey’s | 4/4 | 0.6156 |
pCIneo vs pArc(W197A) | Two-factor, mean | ANOVA Tukey’s | 4/4 | 0.7621 | |
(Fig. 3F) IF Surface GluA1 | mCherry vs mCherry-Arc(WT) | Two-factor, mean | ANOVA Tukey’s | 59/60 | <0.0001 |
mCherry vs mCherry-Arc(W197A) | Two-factor, mean | ANOVA Tukey’s | 59/42 | 0.3438 | |
(Fig. 3G) IF mCherry expression | mCherry vs mCherry-Arc(WT) | Two-factor, mean | ANOVA Tukey’s | 3/3 | 0.5625 |
mCherry vs mCherry-Arc(W197A) | Two-factor, mean | ANOVA Tukey’s | 3/3 | 0.9211 | |
(Fig. 3H) IB Arc expression | mCherry-Arc(WT) vs mCherry- Arc(W197A) | Two-factor, mean | ANOVA Tukey’s | 3/3 | 0.6892 |
mCherry-Arc(WT) vs mCherry- Arc(195-199A) | Two-factor, mean | ANOVA Tukey’s | 3/3 | 0.4951 | |
(Fig. 4) Arc–AP-2 interaction | Arc(WT) vs untransfected amplitude frequency | Two-factor, mean | Mann–Whitney | 12/20 | 0.0002 0.47 |
Arc(W197A) vs untransfected amplitude frequency | Two-factor, mean | Mann–Whitney | 13/20 | 0.121 0.98 |
Arc(195-199A) vs untransfected amplitude frequency | Two-factor, mean | Mann–Whitney | 10/20 | 0.372 0.18 |
eGFP vs untransfected amplitude frequency | Two-factor, mean | Mann–Whitney | 7/20 | 0.376 0.39 | |
(Fig. 5) cDNA constructs and mEPSC kinetics | All constructs vs untransfected rise decay | Two-factor, mean | Mann–Whitney | 6/18 | >0.05 >0.05 |
(Fig. 6) AP-2 requirement for Arc mediated changes in synaptic strength | μ2-miRNA2 vs untransfected amplitude frequency | Two-factor, mean | Mann–Whitney | 9/12 | 0.07 0.37 |
Arc(WT) + μ2-miRNA2 vs untransfected amplitude frequency | Two-factor, mean | Mann–Whitney | 16/12 | 0.52 0.63 |
Arc(WT) + n.c.miRNA vs untransfected amplitude frequency | Two-factor, mean | Mann–Whitney | 7/12 | 0.001 0.08 |
μ2-miRNA3 vs untransfected amplitude frequency | Two-factor, mean | Mann–Whitney | 10/8 | 0.68 0.45 |
Arc(WT) + μ2-miRNA3 vs untransfected amplitude frequency | Two-factor, mean | Mann–Whitney | 6/8 | 0.27 0.14 | |
(Fig. 7) The Arc-AP-2μ interaction is required for Arc-mediated changes in synaptic strength | Arc(WT) +μ2-miRNA2+μ2 vs untransfected amplitude frequency | Two-factor, mean | Mann–Whitney | 14/14 | 0.0001 0.37 |
Arc(195-199A)+μ2-miRNA2+μ2 vs untransfected amplitude frequency | Two-factor, mean | Mann–Whitney | 9/14 | 0.46 0.64 | |
(Fig. 8) AP-2 is required for homeostatic scaling | Control vs bicuculline (untransfected) amplitude frequency | Two-factor, mean | Mann–Whitney | 10/15 | 0.0001 0.64 |
miRNA2 (bicuculline) vs untransfected (bicuculline) amplitude frequency | Two-factor, mean | Mann–Whitney | 6/15 | 0.0001 0.59 |
n.c.miRNA (bicuculline) vs untransfected amplitude frequency | Two-factor, mean | Mann–Whitney | 5/15 | 0.007 0.29 | |