Fig. 3: Relationship between nuclear number and cell size after 14 days of denervation.

a–d Highlights the mean (arithmetic) value per muscle, while e–h shows the frequency distribution per fiber, for cross-sectional area (a, e), nuclear number per mm (b, f), domain volumes (c, g), and surface domains (d, h) in denervated muscle (green) and normal muscle (orange, these are the same data as presented in Fig. 1). Asterisks (*) indicate significantly different means based on results from two-sided Welch’s t-test: a (p < 0.0001, t = 7.707, and df = 9), b (p = 0.9719, t = 0.03611, and df = 10), c (p = 0.0001, t = 6.220, and df = 9) and d (p < 0.0001, t = 5.857, and df = 12). i–n Relationships of nuclear number and fiber size analyzed for denervated muscle (green) compared to normal muscles (orange). Statistics for the normal muscles are presented in Fig. 1. i Nuclear number per mm versus cross-sectional area for denervated fibers (solid black line) tested against a linear scaling (b = 1, green solid line). Comparison of fits gave a F-value of 109.9 (p < 0.0001). j Domain volumes versus cross-sectional area were tested against the solid green line (b = 0). Comparison of fits gave an F-value of 153.1 (p < 0.0001). k Nuclear number versus cell volume plotted and analyzed in log–log space gave a slope of b = 0.36 (95% CI: 0.28, 0.44). l Nuclear number per mm versus the fiber perimeter were statistically tested against a linear relationship (solid green line). Comparison of fits yielded a F-value of 11.51 (p = 0.0010). m Surface domains versus cross-sectional area tested against a horizontal slope (b = 0, solid green line), gave an F-value of 23.85 (p < 0.0001). n Nuclear number versus surface area plotted in log–log space gave a slope of b = 0.64 (95% CI: 0.51, 0.77). In i–n regression lines were fitted with an OLS method with (1, 92) degrees of freedom and compared with the extra sum-of-squares F-test. n = 8 (denervated) and 6 (normal) muscles for a–d, while n = 94 (denervated) and 96 (normal) cells for e–h. Error bars in a–d represent the 95% CI and the curves in e–h were fitted by a Gaussian function. Source data are provided as a Source Data file.