Table 1.

Statistical analyses

ResultsData structureType of testn numbersProbability, p
(Fig. 2A, top) IB pull-down αGST-Arc(WT) vs GSTTwo-factor, meant test3/3< 0.0001
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(W197A)Two-factor, meant test3/3< 0.0001
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(195-199A)Two-factor, meant test3/3< 0.0001
(Fig. 2A, middle) IB pull-down µ2GST vs GST-Arc(WT)Two-factor, meant test3/3< 0.0001
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(W197A)Two-factor, meant test3/30.0007
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(195-199A)Two-factor, meant test3/30.0039
(Fig. 2B) IB pull-down dyn2-GFPGST-Arc(WT) vs GSTTwo-factor, meant test3/3< 0.0001
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(W197A)Two-factor, meant test3/30.0159
(Fig. 2C) IB pull-down GFP-Triad3AGST-Arc(WT) vs GSTTwo-factor, meant test3/3< 0.0001
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(W197A)Two-factor, meant test3/30.0055
GST-Arc(WT) vs GST-Arc(195-199A)Two-factor, meant test3/30.0055
(Fig. 3A) IB Surface GluA1pCIneo vs pArc(WT)Two-factor, meanANOVA Tukey’s3/30.1284
pCIneo vs pArc(W197A)Two-factor, meanANOVA Tukey’s4/40.5543
(Fig. 3B) IB Surface GluA2pCIneo vs pArc(WT)Two-factor, meanANOVA Tukey’s4/4>0.9999
pCIneo vs pArc(W197A)Two-factor, meanANOVA Tukey’s4/40.9637
(Fig. 3B) IB Surface EGFRpCIneo vs pArc(WT)Two-factor, meanANOVA Tukey’s4/40.6156
pCIneo vs pArc(W197A)Two-factor, meanANOVA Tukey’s4/40.7621
(Fig. 3F) IF Surface GluA1mCherry vs mCherry-Arc(WT)Two-factor, meanANOVA Tukey’s59/60<0.0001
mCherry vs mCherry-Arc(W197A)Two-factor, meanANOVA Tukey’s59/420.3438
(Fig. 3G) IF mCherry expressionmCherry vs mCherry-Arc(WT)Two-factor, meanANOVA Tukey’s3/30.5625
mCherry vs mCherry-Arc(W197A)Two-factor, meanANOVA Tukey’s3/30.9211
(Fig. 3H) IB Arc expressionmCherry-Arc(WT) vs mCherry- Arc(W197A)Two-factor, meanANOVA Tukey’s3/30.6892
mCherry-Arc(WT) vs mCherry- Arc(195-199A)Two-factor, meanANOVA Tukey’s3/30.4951
(Fig. 4) Arc–AP-2 interactionArc(WT) vs untransfected amplitude frequencyTwo-factor, meanMann–Whitney12/200.0002 0.47
Arc(W197A) vs untransfected amplitude frequencyTwo-factor, meanMann–Whitney13/200.121 0.98
Arc(195-199A) vs untransfected amplitude frequencyTwo-factor, meanMann–Whitney10/200.372 0.18
eGFP vs untransfected amplitude frequencyTwo-factor, meanMann–Whitney7/200.376 0.39
(Fig. 5) cDNA constructs and mEPSC kineticsAll constructs vs untransfected rise decayTwo-factor, meanMann–Whitney6/18>0.05 >0.05
(Fig. 6) AP-2 requirement for Arc mediated changes in synaptic strengthμ2-miRNA2 vs untransfected amplitude frequencyTwo-factor, meanMann–Whitney9/120.07 0.37
Arc(WT) + μ2-miRNA2 vs untransfected amplitude frequencyTwo-factor, meanMann–Whitney16/120.52 0.63
Arc(WT) + n.c.miRNA vs untransfected amplitude frequencyTwo-factor, meanMann–Whitney7/120.001 0.08
μ2-miRNA3 vs untransfected amplitude frequencyTwo-factor, meanMann–Whitney10/80.68 0.45
Arc(WT) + μ2-miRNA3 vs untransfected amplitude frequencyTwo-factor, meanMann–Whitney6/80.27 0.14
(Fig. 7) The Arc-AP-2μ interaction is required for Arc-mediated changes in synaptic strengthArc(WT) +μ2-miRNA2+μ2 vs untransfected amplitude frequencyTwo-factor, meanMann–Whitney14/140.0001 0.37
Arc(195-199A)+μ2-miRNA2+μ2 vs untransfected amplitude frequencyTwo-factor, meanMann–Whitney9/140.46 0.64
(Fig. 8) AP-2 is required for homeostatic scalingControl vs bicuculline (untransfected) amplitude frequencyTwo-factor, meanMann–Whitney10/150.0001 0.64
miRNA2 (bicuculline) vs untransfected (bicuculline) amplitude frequencyTwo-factor, meanMann–Whitney6/150.0001 0.59
n.c.miRNA (bicuculline) vs untransfected amplitude frequencyTwo-factor, meanMann–Whitney5/150.007 0.29