Supplementary Fig. 4: Peptide validation and training results of rats presented in Fig. 3.
From: Silent synapses dictate cocaine memory destabilization and reconsolidation
(a) (left and bottom) Diagram showing experimental setup for the induction of LTP at Schaffer collateral to CA1 synapses, with example field EPSPs before and after LTP induction. (right) Summarized results showing that this form of LTP, which was sensitive to the NMDAR-selective antagonist APV, was abolished in sliced pre-incubated with TGL, but not AGL (at time 60min: control = 1.48 ± 0.10, n = 8 cells; APV = 0.969 ± 0.05, n = 6 cells; AGL = 1.45 ± 0.092, n = 7 cells; TGL = 1.174 ± 0.113, n = 8 cells, F207, 1725=3.07, p<0.0001, two-way RM ANOVA; *p<0.05, Bonferroni posttest, cell-based statistics). (b,c) Self-administration training results of rats whose electrophysiology are presented in Fig. 3c–f (saline AGL: infusions – d1= 11.20 ± 3.60, d2= 7.20 ± 2.52, d3= 7.40 ± 1.91, d4= 11.00 ± 2.97, d5= 11.00 ± 2.35, inactive – d1= 12.40 ± 4.20, d2= 5.20 ± 1.69, d3= 3.80 ± 0.97, d4= 7.00 + 1.41, d5= 5.00 ± 1.79, n = 5 animals; saline TGL: infusions – d1= 10.00 ± 1.95, d2= 6.80± 1.07, d3= 7.40 ± 1.44, d4= 6.40 ± 1.72, d5= 5.60 ± 1.17, inactive – d1= 10.60 ± 3.47, d2= 5.80 ± 2.01, d3= 5.80 ± 1.69, d4= 4.40 ± 0.68, d5= 5.60 ± 1.89, n =5 animals; cocaine AGL: infusions – d1= 44.73 ± 3.96, d2= 40.27 ± 6.37, d3= 41.82 ± 5.47, d4= 35.36 ± 4.60, d5= 37.00 ± 7.60, inactive – d1= 34.45 ± 18.39, d2= 14.45 ± 5.17, d3= 18.45 ± 9.14, d4= 8.46 ± 2.40, d5= 9.18 ± 2.24, n = 11 animals; cocaine TGL: infusions – d1= 41.00 ± 7.18, d2= 35.29 ± 5.07, d3= 31.71 ± 3.78, d4= 28.71 ± 3.16, d5= 30.00 ± 4.71, inactive – d1= 12.43 ± 4.07, d2= 13.86 ± 4.38, d3= 15.83 ± 4.73, d4= 9.71 ± 1.49, d5= 11.57 ± 3.56, n = 7 animals). (d) Summary showing no difference in nose poking responding during the 10-min cue re-exposure session in rats presented in Fig. 3c–f (saline AGL = 7.00 ± 0.775, n =5 animals; saline TGL = 13.40 ± 3.30, n = 5 animals, t8=1.89, p=0.09, saline-AGL vs saline-TGL; cocaine AGL = 24.00 ± 2.34, n = 11 animals; cocaine TGL = 22.57 ± 2.94, t16=0.38, p=0.71, cocaine-AGL vs cocaine-TGL, two-tail, unpaired t-test, n.s. > 0.05). (e-g) Example EPSCs over 100 trials from the minimal stimulation assay for the summarized results presented in Fig. 3f. (h-i) Self-administration training results of rats whose morphology results are presented in Fig. 3g–l (saline AGL: infusions – d1= 9.67 ± 1.86, d2= 15.33 ± 2.91, d3= 11.67 ± 2.03, d4= 7.67 ± 0.882, d5= 8.33 ± 1.86, inactive – d1= 16.33 ± 4.63, d2= 7.00 ± 2.52, d3= 6.67 ± 1.76, d4= 4.67 ± 1.67, d5= 7.33 ± 1.86, n = 3 animals; saline TGL: infusions – d1= 7.00 ± 2.00, d2= 14.00 ± 1.53, d3= 20.00 ± 9.50, d4= 11.33 ± 2.03, d5= 12.67 ± 4.18, inactive – d1= 4.67 ± 2.33, d2= 11.33 ± 4.26, d3= 8.33 ± 4.84, d4= 7.67 ± 1.33, d5= 8.00 ± 1.53, n = 3 animals; cocaine AGL: infusions – d1= 43.00 ± 4.22, d2= 43.50 ± 7.26, d3= 41.00 ± 7.63, d4= 46.75 ± 5.76, d5= 43.75 ± 6.08, inactive – d1= 29.50 ± 24.24, d2= 4.00 ± 0.816, d3= 3.50 ± 1.66, d4= 4.25 ± 1.84, d5= 1.25 ± 0.946, n = 4 animals; cocaine TGL: infusions – d1= 44.00 ± 2.86, d2= 46.75 ± 4.11, d3= 54.50 ± 8.91, d4= 41.75 ± 4.91, d5= 38.75 ± 4.11, inactive – d1= 6.25 ± 3.97, d2= 3.00 ± 2.35, d3= 7.75 ± 2.50, d4= 5.50 ± 1.26, d5= 2.75 ± 1.32, n = 4 animals). (j) Summary showing no difference in nose poking responding during the 10-min cue re-exposure session in rats presented in Fig. 3g–l (saline AGL = 12.33 ± 5.04, n =3 animals; saline TGL = 13.00 ± 2.52, n = 3 animals, t4=0.118, p=0.9116, saline-AGL vs saline-TGL; cocaine AGL = 29.50 ± 1.56, n = 4 animals; cocaine TGL = 30.00 ± 5.12, t6=0.094, p=0.9285, cocaine-AGL vs cocaine-TGL, two-tail, unpaired t-test, n.s. > 0.05). See Supplementary Table 1 for exact p values for all comparisons made during posthoc tests. Data presented as mean±SEM.
