Fig. 2: LC-NA inputs to the ACC are not involved in direct fear of the looming or CFC tests.
From: The lateralized LC-NAergic system distinguishes vicarious versus direct fear in mice
a Schematic diagram illustrating optogenetic inhibition during the looming test. This figure was created using BioRender.com (https://BioRender.com/j61j226). b, c Quantification of freezing behavior with optogenetic inhibition in the rACC (b) (YFP n = 10, NpHR n = 9, Group (F (1, 17) = 1.904, p = 0.1855)) or the lACC (c) (YFP n = 10, NpHR n = 7, Group (F (1, 19) = 0.3236, p = 0.5761)) during the looming test. d Schematic diagram illustrating optogenetic inhibition during the CFC test. e, f Quantification of freezing behavior with optogenetic inhibition in the rACC (e) (YFP n = 12, NpHR n = 10, CFC conditioning: Group (F (1, 20) = 0.4989, p = 0.4881), Context memory: Group (F (1, 20) = 0.003333, p = 0.9545), Cue memory: Group (F (1, 20) = 0.02339, p = 0.8800)) or the lACC (f) (YFP n = 10, NpHR n = 11, CFC conditioning: Group (F (1, 19) = 0.002905, p = 0.9576), Context memory: Group (F (1, 19) = 0.4022, p = 0.5335), Cue memory: Group (F (1, 19) = 0.01338, p = 0.9091)) during fear conditioning and its memory test after 24 h. Data are presented as mean ± S.E.M. Error bars represent S.E.M. ns: not significant; *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001 (two-way ANOVA followed by Sidak’s multiple comparisons test for (b, c, e, f)). The exact p-values and source data are provided in the Supplementary Tables for statistical details and in the Source Data file.
