Claims 24
From the paper Cortical Zinc Signaling Is Necessary for Changes in Mouse Pupil Diameter That Are Evoked by Background Sounds with Different Contrasts · claims file · checked 2026-10-22: ready
- fig1f-tone-response-inverse-u
Peak pure-tone responses of A1 principal cells, contrasts combined, vary with baseline PD in an inverse U, largest at intermediate baseline PD (Kruskal-Wallis p = 5.91e-7, 295 tone-responsive cells from eight animals).
we also observed an inverse U relationship, where pure-tone response amplitudes are largest at baseline PDs that are within ... the intermediate range of an animal's PD [Fig. 1f, relative to maximum animal PD; p = 5.91 × 10−7, one-way Kruskal–Wallis test, 295 tone-responsive cells
Results, CGC is more robust at intermediate baseline PD, paragraph 2; Figure 1fHow it will be judged
Group A mice, all trials (the 50% limit applies to evoked pupil analyses, not Fig. 1). Per cell and baseline PD bin, the average peak pure-tone response over that cell's trials of both contrasts in the bin (shared methods, both peak readings). Kruskal-Wallis across the seven bins on the cell-bin values. Reproduced when p < 0.05 and the bin with the highest mean is neither the first nor the last. The lower edge of bin 1 is open, (a) all trials below 21% or (b) 10 to 21%; both run.
- fig1g-reliability-intermediate
Response reliability (trial-to-trial zero-lag cross-correlation of pure-tone responses at 2-3.2 s) is highest at intermediate baseline PD, along with response amplitude (Kruskal-Wallis p = 3.25e-8).
increased trial-to-trial consistency in the timing of pure-tone responses, termed reliability, coincides with increased pure-tone response amplitudes at intermediate baseline PD (Fig. 1g; reliability calculated as average zero lag trial-to-trial cross-correlation between all pairs of pure-tone response ΔF/F traces at 2–3.2 s; p = 3.25 × 10−8, one-way Kruskal–Wallis test)
Results, CGC is more robust at intermediate baseline PD, paragraph 2; Figure 1gHow it will be judged
Group A, cells and bins as in fig1f-tone-response-inverse-u. Per cell and bin, the mean over all pairs of trials in the bin of the zero-lag cross-correlation of the pure-tone response traces at 2 to 3.2 s (Methods and Results). The normalization is open, (a) Pearson correlation of the two traces (the axis reads "reliability (C.C.)"), (b) the normalized cross-correlation without mean removal; both run. Cell-bins with fewer than two trials have no value. Reproduced when the Kruskal-Wallis test across bins has p < 0.05 and the bin with the highest mean is neither the first nor the last.
- fig1h-cgc-largest-intermediate
The contrast scaling factor (CGC magnitude) is largest at intermediate baseline PD (Kruskal-Wallis p = 3.03e-5).
the magnitude of CGC is, like pure-tone response amplitudes (Fig. 1f), largest at intermediate baseline PDs (Fig. 1h; p= 3.03 × 10−5, one-way Kruskal–Wallis test)
Results, CGC is more robust at intermediate baseline PD, paragraph 3; Figure 1hHow it will be judged
Group A, cells responsive in both contrasts. Per cell and bin with trials of both contrasts, the contrast scaling factor (shared methods, both peak readings). Kruskal-Wallis across the seven bins. Reproduced when p < 0.05 and the bin with the highest mean factor is neither the first nor the last.
- fig1h-cgc-evident-all-bins
CGC is evident throughout the baseline PD range, the contrast scaling factor being significantly above 1 in every baseline PD bin.
We deemed CGC evident when contrast scaling factors were significantly >1. Contrast scaling factors plotted across baseline PD reveal that CGC is evident throughout the baseline PD range
Results, CGC is more robust at intermediate baseline PD, paragraph 3; Figure 1h; Discussion, paragraph 3How it will be judged
Values as in fig1h-cgc-largest-intermediate. The paper names no test for "significantly >1", no sidedness and no correction. Readings, (a) one-sample Wilcoxon signed-rank test of the cell factors against 1, (b) one-sample t-test against 1, each run one-sided and two-sided at p < 0.05 per bin, uncorrected. Reproduced when, under each reading, every bin's mean factor is above 1 and the test is significant in every bin; the bins and p-values are shown.
- fig1i-baseline-contrast-interaction
Peak pure-tone responses depend on baseline PD (F(6,1871) = 10.74, p = 9.04e-12), with a significant interaction between contrast and baseline PD (F(6,1871) = 6.01, p = 3.10e-6).
we observed a significant association between baseline PD and response amplitude (Fig. 1i; F(6,1871) = 10.74, p =9.04× 10−12, two-way ANOVA). Notably, we found a significant interaction between contrast and baseline PD (Fig. 1i; F(6,1871)= 6.01, p = 3.10 × 10−6)
Results, CGC is more robust at intermediate baseline PD, paragraph 3; Figure 1iHow it will be judged
Group A. Per cell, bin and contrast, the average peak pure-tone response (shared methods, both peak readings). Two-way ANOVA with bin (7 levels) and contrast (2), with interaction. Which cell-bins enter is open, (a) every cell-bin-contrast with trials, (b) only cell-bins with trials of both contrasts; both run. Reproduced when, under one reading whose count of values is within tolerance, both the bin effect and the interaction have p < 0.05; partially reproduced when only the bin effect does.
- fig1i-contrast-effect-intermediate-only
Only at the intermediate baseline PD bin of 43-54% do peak pure-tone responses differ significantly between low and high contrast (Bonferroni corrected post hoc, p = 3.65e-5).
solely at the intermediate baseline PD range where CGC is maximal, we observed a significant effect of contrast on pure-tone responses between low and high contrast (p = 3.65 × 10−5, Bonferroni’s corrected post hoc test)
Discussion, paragraph 3; Figure 1i, fourth binHow it will be judged
On the ANOVA of fig1i-baseline-contrast-interaction, low against high contrast within each of the seven bins, Bonferroni corrected. The paper names Bonferroni and no family, so the family is open, (a) the seven contrast comparisons, one per bin, (b) all 91 pairs of the 14 bin by contrast groups (as a post hoc test of all group means after a two-way ANOVA gives); both run. Reproduced when, under both, the fourth bin is significant at corrected p < 0.05 and no other bin is; methods_underspecified if they disagree.
- fig2b-evoked-pd-whole-drc
Evoked PD averaged over the DRC (0-8 s) is larger in high than in low contrast (Wilcoxon rank sum p = 0.0066).
We found that evoked PD responses to high-contrast sound are significantly larger than those in low contrast across a temporal average of the DRC stimulus (Fig, 2a; 0–8 s; Wilcoxon rank sum test, p = 0.0066)
Results, Sound-evoked PD responses are contrast-dependent but do not predict CGC magnitude, paragraph 1; Figure 2a, bHow it will be judged
Per trial, the mean evoked PD (% baseline) over 0 to 8 s from DRC onset, trials with baseline PD < 50% of animal max, CTRL trials of the CGC assay (DRC with the pure tone, as Fig. 2a shows). Open, run under each reading - the mice, (a) group A, (b) group B before ZX1, (c) groups A and B pooled, if they are distinct mice (the Methods list both for Fig. 2a-c); the unit of the test, (a) trials, (b) per-animal means per contrast. Two-sided Wilcoxon rank sum, high against low. Reproduced when high exceeds low with p < 0.05 under every reading; if the readings differ, methods_underspecified with every result shown.
- fig2c-evoked-pd-1-2s
Before the pure tone, evoked PD averaged over 1-2 s is also larger in high than in low contrast (Wilcoxon rank sum p = 0.043).
we analyzed responses at 1–2 s and again observed significantly larger evoked PD during high contrast (Fig. 2c; 1–2 s; Wilcoxon rank sum test, p = 0.043)
Results, Sound-evoked PD responses are contrast-dependent but do not predict CGC magnitude, paragraph 1; Figure 2cHow it will be judged
As fig2b-evoked-pd-whole-drc, with the per-trial mean over 1 to 2 s, under the same readings.
- fig2e-drc-responses-no-difference
A1 principal cell responses averaged over the first 2 s of the DRC do not differ between low and high contrast, before or after ZX1 (520 tone-responsive cells from 14 mice).
we averaged cell response magnitude across 0–2 s (Fig. 2e). We did not observe any significant difference in response magnitude in either control or ZX1 (Wilcoxon rank sum test for control: z = 0.0073, p = 0.9942; after ZX1, z = −1.2425, p = 0.2141)
Results, Sound-evoked PD responses are contrast-dependent but do not predict CGC magnitude, paragraphs 1 and 2; Figure 2d, eHow it will be judged
Group B. Per cell and condition, the mean over 0 to 2 s of the trial-averaged dF/F (F0_DRC over -1.2 to 0 s). A claim of absence, judged on the paper's test - two-sided Wilcoxon rank sum of cell values, low against high, in CTRL and in ZX1 separately. Reproduced when neither is significant at p < 0.05; not reproduced when either is; the median difference is given either way. Cell inclusion readings as in the shared methods; the count is checked under each.
- fig3b-lme-coefficients
In an LME model of cell peak pure-tone responses, baseline PD contributes significantly (F(1,165.06) = 8.70, p = 3.64e-3), while evoked PD at 1-2 s (p = 0.108) and its interaction with contrast (p = 0.756) do not.
we found that the baseline PD model coefficient significantly differed from zero and thus significantly contributed to neuronal responses (F(1,165.06) = 8.70; p = 3.64 × 10−3). Neither sound-evoked PD responses (F(1,167.17)= 2.61; p = 0.108) nor their interaction with contrast (F(1,169.59) = 0.0971; p = 0.756) contributed to predicting neuronal pure-tone responses
Results, Sound-evoked PD responses are contrast-dependent but do not predict CGC magnitude, paragraph 2; Figure 3b; Methods, Pupillometry, analysis, paragraph 3How it will be judged
Group A. Which cells is open, (a) cells responsive in both contrasts (the Methods rule for CGC analyses), (b) all tone-responsive cells of fig1f-tone-response-inverse-u; both run. Model as in the Methods, peakPureToneResponse ~ baseline_PD + contrast x pupil_at_1-2s + (1 | subject) + (1 | baseline_PD) + (1 | pupil_at_1-2s), baseline_PD in % animal max (Fig. 3a axis), pupil_at_1-2s the trial's mean evoked PD over 1 to 2 s in % baseline; F tests of the fixed effects with Satterthwaite df. Rows are cell by trial (the pupil terms are per trial), with the trial peak response. Open, run under each reading - trials, (a) all, (b) baseline PD < 50%. The positive claim (baseline PD) is reproduced when p < 0.05 under every reading; the absence parts (evoked PD and its interaction) are judged on the paper's test, reproduced when neither has p < 0.05. The claim is reproduced when all three parts hold, partially when the baseline part or the absence parts hold alone.
- fig3c-lme-likelihood-ratio
The full LME model with evoked PD and its contrast interaction does not predict pure-tone responses better than a null model with baseline PD alone (likelihood ratio test p = 0.330).
The full model including sound-evoked PD responses and their interaction with contrast did not significantly improve neuronal pure-tone response prediction when compared with the null model (p = 0.330)
Results, Sound-evoked PD responses are contrast-dependent but do not predict CGC magnitude, paragraph 2; Figure 3cHow it will be judged
Data and full model as in fig3b-lme-coefficients; null model peakPureToneResponse ~ baseline_PD + (1 | subject) + (1 | baseline_PD) (Methods). Both fitted by maximum likelihood (needed to compare models with different fixed effects; a standard choice). A claim of absence, judged on the paper's test - reproduced when the likelihood ratio test has p >= 0.05, under each trial reading.
- fig4c-wt-contrast-zx1-effects
In ZnT3-WT mice, contrast and ZX1 both affect the GCA intercept and slope of evoked PD, and contrast interacts with ZX1 (F(1,7921.6) = 24.2, p = 8.85e-7).
In ZnT3-WT mice, we observed a significant effect of both contrast and ZX1 on the intercept ... and on the first-order (linear) time polynomial coefficient (slope) ... We also observed a significant interaction between contrast and ZX1 treatment (Fig. 4c, F(1,7921.6) = 24.2, p = 8.85 × 10−7)
Results, Cortical synaptic zinc signaling is necessary for the increased evoked PD in high- versus low-contrast sound, paragraph 1; Figure 4a, c, eHow it will be judged
Group C, CTRL and ZX1 trials of DRC without the tone, baseline PD < 50%. GCA as in the shared methods, under both model readings and both coding readings. Reproduced when, under every reading, all five terms have p < 0.05; partially reproduced when the contrast x ZX1 term and at least two of the four main terms do; methods_underspecified if the readings disagree. The signs of the terms and the row count against the df (about 7930 rows) are shown.
- fig4-wt-posthoc
In ZnT3-WT mice, post hoc Tukey tests show an effect of contrast before but not after ZX1, and an effect of ZX1 only on high-contrast evoked PD (p < 0.0001).
Pairwise post hoc Tukey tests revealed a significant effect of contrast before, but not after ZX1 treatment, and solely a significant effect of ZX1 on high-contrast–evoked PD (p < 0.0001 for both comparisons)
Results, Cortical synaptic zinc signaling is necessary for the increased evoked PD in high- versus low-contrast sound, paragraph 1; Figure 4cHow it will be judged
On the model of fig4c-wt-contrast-zx1-effects (each model reading), emmeans of the four contrast x treatment cells at the time polynomials' mean (zero for orthogonal polynomials, emmeans' default), Tukey adjusted pairwise comparisons with Satterthwaite df (Methods). Reproduced when HIGH exceeds LOW in CTRL at p < 0.05 and not in ZX1, and ZX1 lowers HIGH at p < 0.05 and does not change LOW at p < 0.05.
- fig4f-ko-no-contrast-effect
In ZnT3-KO mice, neither contrast nor ZX1 affects the GCA intercept of evoked PD and they do not interact; contrast does not affect the slope.
In ZnT3-KO mice (Fig. 4b), we did not observe a significant effect of either contrast or ZX1 on evoked PD intercept (Fig. 4d,f; contrast, F(1,4500.8) = −1.14, p = 0.255; ZX1, F(1,4502.4) = 1.45, p = 0.147), nor a significant interaction between the two (F(1,4500.2) = −0.540, p = 0.589)
Results, Cortical synaptic zinc signaling is necessary for the increased evoked PD in high- versus low-contrast sound, paragraph 2; Figure 4b, d, fHow it will be judged
Group D, as fig4c-wt-contrast-zx1-effects. A claim of absence, judged on the paper's test - reproduced when the contrast intercept, ZX1 intercept, contrast x ZX1 and contrast slope terms all have p >= 0.05, not reproduced when any has p < 0.05; under each model and coding reading, estimates given. The model readings are part of how the test is written, so a disagreement between them is reported as methods_underspecified.
- fig4f-ko-zx1-slope
In ZnT3-KO mice ZX1 still reduces the GCA slope (p = 0.0129), but its slope weight (-0.64) is less than half that in ZnT3-WT mice (-1.41).
however, we observed a significant effect of ZX1 (F(1,4500.0) = −2.49, p = 0.0129) ... the GCA slope coefficient (weight) for ZX1 in the ZnT3-KO mice (−0.64, Fig. 4f) was less than half that of ZnT3-WT (−1.41, Fig. 4e)
Results, Cortical synaptic zinc signaling is necessary for the increased evoked PD in high- versus low-contrast sound, paragraph 2; Figure 4e, fHow it will be judged
Models of fig4c-wt-contrast-zx1-effects and fig4f-ko-no-contrast-effect; the weight is the tPoly1 x treatment coefficient. Reproduced when, under one model and coding reading, the KO term is negative with p < 0.05 and the KO weight is less than half the WT weight in magnitude; the two weights are checked against the expected values, which also depend on the polynomial scaling (unit norm, as R poly() gives, is used; the paper does not state it).
- fig5-contralateral-zx1-increases
ZX1 infused into the contralateral (left) ACtx increases sound-evoked responses of right A1 principal neurons (one-way repeated measures ANOVA F = 33.44, p = 4.1e-5; control against contralateral ZX1 p = 0.016, Bonferroni; three mice).
infusion of ZX1 to the contralateral ACtx increased the sound-evoked responses of ipsilateral A1 PNs (Fig. 5c–e; three mice, one-way repeated measure ANOVA, F = 33.44, p = 4.1 × 10−5; control vs ZX1 in contralateral ACtx, p = 0.016, Bonferroni's multiple-comparisons test)
Results, Cortical synaptic zinc signaling is necessary for the increased evoked PD in high- versus low-contrast sound, paragraph 4; Figure 5c-eHow it will be judged
Group E, widefield dF/F of right A1 to broadband noise (6 to 64 kHz, 100 ms, 30 to 80 dB SPL, Fig. 5b axis, d legend), F0 the 1 s mean before sound onset (carried over from Methods, Widefield imaging, which states it for the pure-tone mapping, not for Fig. 5). The paper does not give the A1 region, the response measure or window, or what the repeated measures are. Readings, run each - measure, (a) peak dF/F, (b) mean dF/F, in the 1 s after onset (standard window). Repeated units - with three conditions, F = 33.44 gives p = 0.0032 on (2,4) df (three mice), 9e-9 on (2,34) df (three mice by six levels), and 3.7e-5 on (2,10) df, close to the reported 4.1e-5; so the units are read as the sound levels (six on the Fig. 5b axis, 30 to 80 dB SPL), with values averaged over mice, and with and without a Greenhouse-Geisser correction. Units of mice, and of mouse by level, are variants shown. A1 is the region the dataset marks as A1, if it does; else this claim is blocked. Reproduced when the ANOVA has p < 0.05 and contralateral ZX1 exceeds control at Bonferroni p < 0.05 under every measure reading; methods_underspecified if they disagree.
- fig5-ipsilateral-zx1-reduces
Subsequent ZX1 infusion into the ipsilateral ACtx reduces sound-evoked A1 responses compared with contralateral ZX1 (p = 3.2e-5, Bonferroni).
subsequent infusion of ZX1 to ipsilateral ACtx reduced the sound-evoked responses of A1 PNs (Fig. 5d–f; ZX1 in contralateral vs ipsilateral ACtx, p = 3.2 × 10−5, Bonferroni's multiple-comparisons test)
Results, Cortical synaptic zinc signaling is necessary for the increased evoked PD in high- versus low-contrast sound, paragraph 4; Figure 5d-fHow it will be judged
As fig5-contralateral-zx1-increases. Reproduced when ipsilateral ZX1 is below contralateral ZX1 at Bonferroni p < 0.05 under every reading.
- fig5c-no-dye-in-other-hemisphere
After infusion of ZX1 with Alexa Fluor 594 into the left ACtx, no Alexa Fluor 594 is seen in the right ACtx, suggesting ZX1 does not travel to the other hemisphere.
We found that the infusion of ZX1 + Alexa Fluor 594 to the left (contralateral) ACtx does not show the presence of Alexa Fluor 594 in the ipsilateral ACtx under the red channel (Fig. 5c)
Results, Cortical synaptic zinc signaling is necessary for the increased evoked PD in high- versus low-contrast sound, paragraph 3; Figure 5cHow it will be judged
Shown with a representative red-channel image and no measure. Testable only if the dataset holds the red-channel images of the right ACtx before and after contralateral infusion; the paper gives no threshold for presence, so the claim is reported as methods_underspecified with the mean red intensities shown, unless the images make the answer plain both ways (no change at all, or a change of the order seen after the ipsilateral infusion).
- fig6a-baseline-pd-drift
Baseline PD increases with recording time in both ZX1 (slope 95% CI 0.0798 to 0.183, p = 1.26e-6) and ACSF experiments (95% CI 0.0159 to 0.279, p = 0.0282), and the intervals overlap.
We observed a significant time-dependent increase in baseline PD across the recording duration of ZX1 experiments [Fig. 6a; slope 95% CI = (0.0798, 0.183), p = 1.26 × 10−6] ... we used ACSF as a control and found a similar time-dependent increase in baseline PD [Fig. 6a; slope 95% CI = (0.0159, 0.279), p = 0.0282]
Results, Cortical synaptic zinc signaling is necessary for the increased evoked PD in high- versus low-contrast sound, paragraph 5; Figure 6aHow it will be judged
Per trial, baseline PD (% animal max, over -4 to 0 s) against recording time in minutes (Fig. 6a axes; the time origin, the first trial, changes no slope), all trials of the experiment, pooled over mice, ordinary least squares (Methods, Statistics). Which ZX1 experiments is open, run each - (a) groups C and D, (b) group C only, (c) groups B, C and D. ACSF is group F. Reproduced when both slopes are positive with p < 0.05 and their 95% CIs overlap, under every ZX1 reading; the slopes and intervals are compared with the reported ones.
- fig6b-acsf-contrast-effect
After ACSF injection the contrast effect on evoked PD remains, on both the GCA intercept (F(1,2558.3) = 46.22, p = 1.31e-11) and slope (F(1,2558) = 15.076, p = 1.10e-4).
following ACSF injection, unlike following ZX1 injection (Fig. 4a,c,e), we observed a significant effect of contrast on both the intercept and fitted slope coefficient of the first-order time polynomial (Fig. 6b; intercept, F(1,2558.3) = 46.22, p = 1.31 × 10−11; slope, F(1,2558)= 15.076, p = 1.10× 10−4)
Results, Cortical synaptic zinc signaling is necessary for the increased evoked PD in high- versus low-contrast sound, paragraph 5; Figure 6bHow it will be judged
Group F, baseline PD < 50%. Open, run each - (a) trials after ACSF only, pupil ~ (tPoly1 + tPoly2) x contrast + (1 | subject); (b) trials before and after ACSF, the model of fig4c-wt-contrast-zx1-effects with ACSF as treatment, the contrast terms (and the contrast effect within ACSF from emmeans). Reproduced when the contrast intercept and slope terms both have p < 0.05 with HIGH above LOW under every reading; methods_underspecified if they disagree. Row counts are shown against the df (about 2560 rows).
- fig6c-no-baseline-evoked-correlation
Below 50% of animal max baseline PD, baseline PD and evoked PD at 1-2 s are not significantly correlated (r(238) = -0.0928, p = 0.1537).
we limited our pupil response analyses to the 50th percentile of baseline PD ... at which there was no significant correlation between baseline PD and evoked PD (Fig. 6c; Pearson's correlation coefficient, r(238) = −0.0928, p = 0.1537)
Results, Cortical synaptic zinc signaling is necessary for the increased evoked PD in high- versus low-contrast sound, paragraph 5; Figure 6cHow it will be judged
Per trial, baseline PD (% animal max) against mean evoked PD over 1 to 2 s (% baseline), both contrasts, baseline PD < 50% (Fig. 6c legend). Which experiments is not given; the readings are each group (A, B before ZX1, C, D, F) and the CTRL or all trials of each, and the reading used is the one whose count of responses is within tolerance of 240. A claim of absence, judged on the paper's test - reproduced when that reading's Pearson correlation has p >= 0.05. If no reading or more than one matches the count, every result is shown, and the claim is methods_underspecified unless all agree.
- methods-baseline-evoked-correlation
Evoked pupil responses are negatively correlated with baseline PD over all responses (r(624) = -0.35, p = 1.20e-19), and the correlation is small and not significant below 50% of animal max PD (r(382) = -0.055, p = 0.285).
evoked pupil responses are significantly negatively correlated with baseline PD (data not shown; r(624) = −0.35, p = 1.20 × 10−19). At PDs <50% of maximum animal PD, this correlation becomes much smaller and is no longer significant (Fig. 6b; r(382) = −0.055, p = 0.285)
Materials and Methods, Pupillometry, analysis, paragraph 2How it will be judged
Measures as in fig6c-no-baseline-evoked-correlation (evoked PD at 1-2 s; the paper does not name the window here, 0 to 2 s and 0 to 8 s are variants). The data set is not named (the text cites Fig. 6b, an ACSF panel, which has no correlation); the readings are those of fig6c-no-baseline-evoked-correlation, and the one used is the one whose counts are within tolerance of 626 and 384. Reproduced when, on that reading, the correlation over all responses is negative with p < 0.05 and within tolerance, and the one below 50% has p >= 0.05. If no reading or more than one matches the counts, every result is shown, and the claim is methods_underspecified unless all agree.
- fig6d-ko-reduced-high-contrast
Before ZX1, ZnT3-KO mice have smaller evoked PD increases to high-contrast sound than ZnT3-WT mice, a genotype effect on the GCA slope (F(1,3869) = 22.37, p = 2.33e-6).
observed a significant effect of genotype on the slope coefficient of the first-order time polynomial (Fig. 6d; F(1,3869) = 22.37, p = 2.33 × 10−6). Namely, ZnT3-KO mice have reduced PD responses in high contrast
Results, Cortical synaptic zinc signaling is necessary for the increased evoked PD in high- versus low-contrast sound, paragraphs 6 and 7; Figure 6dHow it will be judged
CTRL high-contrast trials of groups C and D (Fig. 6d legend, the light orange responses of Fig. 4a, b), baseline PD < 50%. GCA as in the shared methods with pupil ~ (tPoly1 + tPoly2) x genotype + (1 | subject) (Methods); the factor coding is open as in the shared methods, (a) reference coding with WT as reference, (b) effects coding, both run. Reproduced when the tPoly1 x genotype term has p < 0.05 and the KO slope is below the WT slope. Row count shown against the df (about 3870 rows).
- discussion-zx1-wt-like-ko
After ZX1, high-contrast PD responses of ZnT3-WT mice peak at about 110% of baseline, like the high-contrast responses of ZnT3-KO mice, and with zinc signaling blocked both contrasts resemble low-contrast responses.
upon blockade, responses to both low and high contrast resembled low-contrast responses, which were of comparable magnitude in ZnT3-WT and ZnT3-KO mice (Fig. 4) ... the magnitude of PD responses to high-contrast sound after ZX1 infusion in ZnT3-WT mice (Fig. 4c; peak at ∼110% PD) is not different from the magnitude of high-contrast PD responses in ZnT3-KO mice (Fig. 4d; peak at ∼110% PD)
Discussion, paragraphs 6 and 7; Figure 4c, dHow it will be judged
The peaks are given as approximate ("∼110%"), read from Fig. 4c, d, and no test is named for "not different". The quantity is the maximum of the trial-mean trace (% baseline, baseline PD < 50%) within 0 to 2 s (the Fig. 4c, d window), minus 100. The tolerance is a quarter of the 10 point rise, as the paper gives the values only to the nearest few percent; 10% of the 110 would accept no rise at all. Which KO trials is open, (a) CTRL, (b) CTRL and ZX1 pooled; both run, and the claim holds when the WT value and the KO value under one reading are within tolerance.
Pipeline
- Paper
- done (1 of 1)
- Claims
- done
- Claims check
- done (ready)
- Attempt
- todo
- Questions
- none
- Verified
- none