we found that the threshold is unaltered, but the gain is reduced in mutants ( Figures 9G-H )
Results, Functional visual circuits form in the absence of Pcdh- γ s, paragraph 4; Figure 9H
The readings of the nonlinearity's form disagree. With the printed form (B + G y above theta), mutant gains are lower and the bands separate in all 18 combinations (reading A, frame fit, median 18.4 against 23.1 Hz per SD, ratio 0.80). With the continuous form (B + G (y - theta)), the bands overlap in 9 of 18, separate with mutant gains lower in 4 (reading B, binomial and bootstrap) and the other way in 5 (readings A and C); the DKW bands overlap in all 6 continuous-form combinations (reading A, frame fit, median 30.4 against 30.8, KS p = 0.76). Under reading B the continuous-form separations rest mostly on the 4 to 13 mutant gains below the lowest control gain, and under reading A, frame fit, bootstrap, on 1 mutant against 6 control cells; the others lie inside the distributions (reading A, binned fit, 165 of 200 mutant and 113 of 122 control cells at or below 41.46; reading C, frame fit, 16 to 19 mutant against 23 to 25 control cells near 21.2). Among units with clear STAs neither form gives lower mutant gains under reading A (printed 23.1 against 23.4, continuous 33.1 against 31.0); over the three readings in that subset the printed form separates with mutant gains lower in 6 of 18 combinations and the continuous form in 4, with 6 the other way and no DKW separation, so the outcome there is blocked too. With the frames as deposited the continuous form separates in 4 of 18, all with mutant gains lower, and the outcome is the same. On synthetic cells that follow the continuous form (theta 0.5, G 20), the printed-form frame fit returns theta 0.75 and G 13.4, so part of the printed-form gain reduction may mirror the higher mutant thresholds.
How the test differed from the paper’s method
- The vertical bars of 20080702_R1 and 20080702_R4 are rebuilt with a frame of 16.6718 ms, as for fig9d-rf-size-similar.