Fig. 7: TUBB4B is not essential for vision in mice.
A Representative scotopic (rod) ERG responses in Tubb4b−/− mice (red) and Tubb4b+/+ littermates (black) at P126. Flash intensity = 0.059 cd*s/m2. B Representative photopic (cone) ERG responses in Tubb4b−/− mice (red) and Tubb4b+/+ littermates (black) at P126. Flash intensity = 23.9 cd*s/m2. C Flash intensity-response relationships for scotopic (rod) a-waves, recorded from P50 to P150. Tubb4b+/+ is shown in black (n = 5) and Tubb4b−/− is in red (n = 10). The dose-response relationship was fitted with the Hill equation, with maximum amplitudes determined as 364 ± 32 and 420 ± 88 µV for +/+ and −/−, respectively. Statistical analysis performed using two-way ANOVA with a post hoc Tukey test showed no significant differences (ns). D Flash intensity-response relationships for photopic (cones) b-waves, recorded from P50 to P150. Tubb4b +/+ is shown in black (n = 5) and Tubb4b−/− is in red (n = 10). The dose-response relationship was fitted with the Hill equation, with maximum amplitudes determined as 113 ± 2, 114 ± 1 µV for +/+ and −/−, respectively. Statistical analysis was performed using two-way ANOVA with a post hoc Tukey test, which showed no significant differences (ns). E Retinal cross-sections from 6-month-old Tubb4b+/+ and Tubb4b−/− littermates, stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stain. Scale bar = 25 µm. Data are presented as mean ± SEM. GCL ganglion cell layer, INL inner nuclear layer, ONL outer nuclear layer.
