Extended Data Fig. 6: Relationships among cFos expression, AMPAR exocytosis levels, and percentage of potentiated spines.

(a) Relation of the percentage of potentiated spines to the mean HT-GluA1 exocytosis among potentiated spines (distance of Dye 2 signal above threshold, averaged over above-threshold spines), for (left) CFC and (right) context-only control. (b) Relation between the mean HT-GluA1 exocytosis among potentiated spines and the corresponding cFos intensity. CFC: n = 19 cells from 4 animals; context-only: n = 22 cells from 6 animals. R, Pearson’s linear correlation coefficient, P value from two-sided Student’s t-test. Distinct animals represented by different shape symbols. (c) Relation between the percentage of potentiated spine and the z-coordinate of the center of soma of the corresponding neuron for (left) CFC, (middle) context-only control, and (right) home cage control. (d) Relation between cFos intensity and the z-coordinate of the center of soma of the corresponding neuron for (left) CFC, (middle) context-only control, and (right) home cage control. (e) Relation between the total number of identified spines and the z-coordinate of the center of soma of the corresponding neuron for (left) CFC, (middle) context-only control, and (right) home cage control. CFC: n = 19 cells from 4 animals; context-only: n = 23 cells from 6 animals; home cage control: n = 12 cells from 3 animals. R, Pearson’s linear correlation coefficient, P value from two-sided Student’s t-test. Distinct animals represented by different shape symbols. (f) Relation between the total number of identified spines and the cFos intensity of the corresponding neuron for (left) CFC, (middle) context-only control, and (right) home cage control. CFC: n = 19 cells from 4 animals; context-only: n = 23 cells from 6 animals; home cage control: n = 12 cells from 3 animals. R, Pearson’s linear correlation coefficient, P value from two-sided Student’s t-test. Distinct animals represented by different shape symbols.