Supplementary Fig. 8: Self-administration training results for rats used in Fig. 5.
From: Silent synapses dictate cocaine memory destabilization and reconsolidation
(a,b) Self-administration training results of rats whose electrophysiology results are presented in Fig. 5b–e (saline: infusions – d1= 14.14 ± 2.70, d2= 12.14 ± 2.44, d3= 9.43 ± 2.33, d4= 11.14 ± 3.23, d5= 8.71 ± 2.12, inactive – d1= 12.29 ± 1.43, d2= 8.29 ± 1.41, d3= 6.71 ± 1.38, d4= 10.71 ± 3.26, d5= 10.14 ± 2.06, n = 7 animals; cocaine: infusions – d1= 37.72 ± 2.26, d2= 32.22 ± 1.14, d3= 34.56 ± 2.24, d4= 40.33 ± 3.64, d5= 40.33 ± 3.02, inactive – d1= 19.56 ± 3.74, d2= 8.67 ± 1.67, d3= 7.17 ± 1.64, d4= 10.00 ± 3.59, d5= 7.89 ± 2.07, n = 18 animals). (c) Summary of nose poke responding during the 10-min cue re-exposure session from rats whose electrophysiology results are presented in Fig. 5b–e. Cocaine-trained rats exhibited higher levels of cue-induced nose poke responding compared to saline-trained rats (saline = 12.29 ± 2.39, n = 7 animals; cocaine = 28.67 ± 1.69, n = 18 animals, t23=5.29, p<0.0001, two-tail, unpaired t-test). (d,e) Example EPSCs (inset) over trials in the minimal stimulation assay from rats whose electrophysiology results are presented in Fig. 4e. (f,g) Self-administration training results of rats whose electrophysiology results are presented in Fig. 5i–l (saline: infusions – d1= 9.40 ± 1.50, d2= 10.00 ± 3.52, d3= 6.60 ± 2.09, d4= 7.80 ± 2.59, d5= 6.60 ± 1.57, inactive – d1= 7.20 ± 1.88, d2= 8.00 + 2.57, d3= 10.20 ± 3.20, d4= 7.20 ± 1.49, d5= 8.00 ± 1.14, n = 5 animals; cocaine: infusions – d1= 44.42 ± 4.14, d2= 35.75 ± 3.39, d3= 37.83 ± 3.19, d4= 39.33 ± 2.59, d5= 36.00 ± 2.31, inactive – d1= 21.25 ± 5.05, d2= 11.17 ± 3.78, d3= 8.75 ± 2.32, d4= 6.33 ± 2.02, d5= 8.58 ± 2.74, n = 12 animals). (h) Summary of nose poke responding during the 10-min cue re-exposure session from rats whose electrophysiology results are presented in Fig. 5i–l. The nose poke responding was higher in cocaine-trained rats compared to saline-trained rats (saline = 4.60 ± 0.51, n= 5 animals; cocaine = 21.08 ± 1.62, n = 12 animals, t15=6.41, p<0.0001, two-tail, unpaired t-test). (i,j) Self-administration training results of rats whose electrophysiology results are presented in Fig. 5t–v (vehicle: infusions – d1= 33.25 ± 9.76, d2= 40.25 ± 6.65, d3= 30.25 ± 1.91, d4= 34.75 ± 3.20, d5= 38.75 ± 2.78, inactive – d1= 35.75 ± 28.13, d2= 21.00 ± 13.02, d3= 9.75 ± 6.22, d4= 6.75 ± 3.82, d5= 6.00 ± 4.38, n = 4 animals; LIMKi: infusions – d1= 44.75 ± 1.89, d2= 31.00 ± 2.12, d3= 37.75 ± 6.36, d4= 43.00 ± 5.82, d5= 41.25 ± 6.38, inactive – d1= 11.50 ± 2.78, d2= 14.00 ±6.38, d3= 5.75 ± 5.11, d4= 7.50 ± 3.79, d5= 5.50 ± 5.17, n = 4 animals) . (k) Summary of nose poke responding during the 10-min cue re-exposure session from rats whose electrophysiology results are presented in Fig. 5i–l. The nose poke responding was not different in animals treated with vehicle or LIMKi (vehicle = 23.50 ± 3.80, n = 4 animals; LIMKi = 19.25 ± 1.03, n = 4 animals, t6=1.08, p=0.3215, two-tail,unpaired t-test). (l,m) Self-administration training results of rats whose morphology results are presented in Fig. 5m–r (saline: infusions – d1= 9.50 ± 0.645, d2= 8.50 ± 1.56, d3= 5.50 ± 2.18, d4= 10.50 ± 1.94, d5= 6.00 ± 2.48, inactive – d1= 6.25 ± 0.629, d2= 4.75 ± 2.18, d3= 3.50 ± 0.866, d4= 8.25 ± 0.250, d5= 3.00 ± 0.707, n = 4 animals; cocaine: infusions – d1= 40.25 ± 1.93, d2= 30.00 ± 5.31, d3= 31.75 ± 4.13, d4= 40.50 ± 1.04, d5 = 40.00 ± 4.88, inactive – d1= 20.50 ± 10.91, d2= 10.25 ± 7.92, d3= 9.50 ± 7.86, d4= 1.25 ± 0.629, d5= 1.00 ± 0.707, n = 4 animals). (n) Summary of nose poke responding during the 10-min cue re-exposure session from rats whose morphology results are presented in Fig. 5m–r. The nose poke responding was higher in cocaine-trained rats compared to saline-trained rats (saline = 5.50 ± 1.19, n = 4 animals; cocaine = 22.00 ± 3.24, n = 4 animals, t6=4.78, p=0.0031, two-tail, unpaired t-test). Data presented as mean±SEM.
