Fig. 2: Patterns of network activity in LEC, HP, and PFC as well as functional communication within LEC-HP-PFC networks in pre-juvenile CON and GE mice. | Nature Communications

Fig. 2: Patterns of network activity in LEC, HP, and PFC as well as functional communication within LEC-HP-PFC networks in pre-juvenile CON and GE mice.

From: Developmental decrease of entorhinal-hippocampal communication in immune-challenged DISC1 knockdown mice

Fig. 2

a Averaged power spectra P(f) of oscillatory activity in CON and GE mice. Insets, violin plots displaying the power averaged for 1–30 Hz in CON and GE mice. b Violin plots displaying the firing rate in CON and GE mice (Wilcoxon rank-sum test, LEC layer 5/6: p = 0.027, zval = −2.20, ranksum = 104; LEC layer 2/3: p = 0.013, zval = −2.47, ranksum = 100; CA1, p = 0.019, zval = −2.34, ranksum = 102; PFC layer 5/6: p = 0.07, zval = −1.81, ranksum = 110; PFC layer 2/3: p = 0.18, zval = −1.35, ranksum = 117). c Line plots displaying the information flow measured by gPDC within LEC-HP-PFC circuits. Insets, violin plots displaying the gPDC when averaged for 4–30 Hz (Wilcoxon rank-sum test, LEC → PFC: p = 0.008, zval = 2.65, ranksum = 254; p = 0.005; HP → PFC: zval = 2.80, ranksum = 257; LEC → HP: p = 0.87, zval = 0.016, ranksum = 206). Right, schematic of information flow within LEC-HP-PFC circuits during pre-juvenile development as resolved by gPDC. The line thickness corresponds to the strength of information flow between brain regions. For violin plots, black and red dots correspond to individual animals and the red horizontal lines display the median as well as 25th and 75th percentiles. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.

Back to article page