Extended Data Fig. 4: Nested analysis of data presented in Figs. 3e and 3g.

A) Data presented in Fig. 3e were re-analyzed using nested ANOVA. Quantification of action potentials (mean ± SEM) generated by current injections in NAc-projecting dpHb neurons (Day: n = 10 neurons from 3 mice; Night: n = 20 neurons from 5 mice; Dark/day: 11 neurons from 4 mice; Light/nigh: 13 neurons from 4 mice). Nested ANOVA with Tukey’s test revealed significant difference among groups at: 60 pA: p = 0.0111, F (3,50) = 4.104 (*); 70 pA: p = 0.0050, F (3,50) = 4.825 (**); 80 pA: p = 0.0034, F (3,50) = 5.176 (**); 90pA: p = 0.0027, F (3,50) = 5.391 (**); ‡: “Day” significantly different from “Night” and “Light/night” significantly different from “dark/day”. B) Data presented in Fig. 3g were re-analyzed using nested two-sided t-test. Circadian variations in the intrinsic excitability of NAc-projecting dpHb neurons after 3 wk LAN exposure. n = 18 neurons from 4 mice for “Day (post 3w LAN)” and 22 neurons from 5 mice for “night (post 3w LAN)”. Data were plotted as mean ± SEM. #: Significant difference determined by nested t-test at 80 pA (p = 0.0296; t = 2.260, df=38) and 90 pA (p = 0.0258, t = 2.320, df=38). Data of “Day (no LAN)” and “Night (no LAN)” were replotted from A in light gray for easy comparison. Difference between Day (no LAN) and Night (no LAN) was annotated by *.