Extended Data Figure 5: Analysis of CA1→subiculum projections with various injection sites in Ten3^Het control and Ten3^KO mice.

a, b, PHA-L (green) injection in distal CA1 (a) and corresponding projection in proximal subiculum (b) in Ten3^Het mouse. Scale bars, 200 μm. c, d, Averaged normalized injection (c) and projection (d) traces of all Ten3^Het (black) and Ten3^KO (red) mice analysed, binned into five groups by the mean position of the injection, and plotted from most proximal (top) to most distal (bottom) injections (bin limits and number of mice per bin listed on the right of d). Proximal–distal axis position is numbered from 1 (most proximal) to 100 (most distal). Shaded error curves represent mean ± s.e.m. at each bin. e, Projection width in subiculum versus injection mean position in CA1 for all mice (Ten3^Het: n = 31, black circles; Ten3^KO: n = 38, red triangles). f, Projection width data binned by injection mean. Number of mice per bin same as d. Projection width was significantly increased in Ten3^KO for the three most proximal bins. ****P < 0.0001; multiplicity-adjusted P values after two-way ANOVA with Šídák’s correction for multiple comparisons. Error bars, mean ± s.e.m. g, Projection mean position in subiculum versus injection mean position in CA1 for all mice used (Ten3^Het: n = 31; Ten3^KO: n = 38), with superimposed linear regression lines (Ten3^Het: R² = 0.9812; Ten3^KO: R² = 0.9515). The slopes were significantly different (P < 0.0001), indicating a less sharp topography in Ten3^KO mice. Bin 1 data (most proximal, injection mean 10–25) in c–g are the same data as in Fig. 2e–g.