Fig. 7: CICADA reveals distinct populations involved in central sensitization.
From: Cell type-specific calcium imaging of central sensitization in mouse dorsal horn
Radar charts showing the percent of cells in Ex6CHRM3 a, Ex5TRHR d, and Ex2TACR1 g which responded to the indicated cutaneous stimuli before (grey) and after capsaicin injection (red). *Q < 0.05, **Q < 0.01, ***Q < 0.001, for each population a Fisher’s exact test (# responses before and after capsaicin) with FDR correction was performed for each modality, only significant results are indicated (Benjamini and Hochberg, 6 tests, exact Q values for all tests in source data). Mechanical sub-modality tuning for Ex6CHRM3 (b), Ex5TRHR (e), and Ex2TACR1 (h) before (grey) and after capsaicin injection (red). Dotted circle is 1 unit vector in diameter. There was a significant main effect of capsaicin (F (1, 123) = 30.10), P < 0.0001 (2-way RM-ANOVA). Post hoc testing was performed comparing post vs pre capsaicin for each group, **Q < 0.01. LT receptive field size of Ex6CHRM3 c, Ex5TRHR f, and Ex2TACR1 i) before (grey) and after capsaicin injection (red). There was a significant main effect of capsaicin (F (1, 148) = 45.59), P < 0.0001, and a significant interaction between capsaicin and CICADA population (F (2, 148) = 5.765), P = 0.0039 (2-way RM-ANOVA). Post hoc testing was performed comparing post/pre capsaicin for all stimulations, ***Q < 0.0001. Only cells with cutaneous input were included in these analyses. Ex2TACR1, 62 cells; Ex5TRHR, 45 cells; Ex6CHRM3, 43 cells (cells pooled from 4 mice). Data shown are mean of pooled cells.
