Fig. 3: Silencing abGCs quenches odor-evoked responses in MCs (awake mice). | Nature Communications

Fig. 3: Silencing abGCs quenches odor-evoked responses in MCs (awake mice).

From: Young adult-born neurons improve odor coding by mitral cells

Fig. 3

a Schematic illustration of the setup, experiment, and timeline. b Examples of odor-evoked calcium transients for ten different neurons from the same mouse. All symbols are the same as in Fig. 2e, g, with the addition that minus signs denote significant differences among suppressed responses. c Cumulative distribution of the proportion of MCs responding to 0–11 odors, before (blue) and after (red) CNO (top) or saline (bottom) (CNO: N = 5 mice, n = 170 cells, p < 0.0001; Saline: N = 5 mice, n = 152 cells, p = 0.62, Kolmogorov–Smirnov tests). d Traces of the average ± SEM calcium responses to odor stimulation before and after CNO or saline administration. Suppressed (CNO: 404 cell-odor pairs, Saline: 251 cell-odor pairs) and excited (CNO: 531 cell-odor pairs, saline: 522 cell-odor pairs) responses are shown separately. Upper colored bar (excited responses, range: 0–6) and lower colored bar (suppressed responses, range: 0–12) are t values between the before-after distributions as a function of time. e Response magnitude in ranked order for all cell-odor pairs showing quenching of both suppressed (negative values) and excited (positive values) responses. (CNO: n = 170 cells, p << 0.0001; saline: n = 152 cells, p = 0.07, Wilcoxon signed rank tests on cells curves’ standard deviations before vs. after CNO). f Response magnitude in ranked order, in absolute values to account for both excited and suppressed responses equally. The values before injection are reduced after CNO but not after saline injection (CNO: p << 0.0001; saline: p = 0.83, Wilcoxon signed rank tests on cells curves’ standard deviations before vs. after CNO). g Quantitative analysis of the difference in responsiveness (number of responses) due to CNO vs. saline. (n = total 322 cells, p << 0.0001, unpaired t-test). h Quantitative analysis of the difference in response magnitude due to CNO vs. saline injections. Suppressed and excited responses are shown separately. nexcited = 1053 cell-odor pairs, p << 0.0001, nsuppressed = 655 cell-odor pairs, p << 0.0001, unpaired t-tests). CNO condition: N = 5 mice; saline condition: N = 5 mice, for all comparisons described in this figure. Statistical tests are two-sided, and error bars are SEMs. a was created with BioRender.com.

Back to article page