Table 1. Spatial Firing Properties of CA1 Neurons Remain Intact
Comparison
Mean rate
Max rate
Mann-Whitney U
K-S
Mann-Whitney U
K-S
P-value
U-value
P-value
K-S stat
P-value
U-value
P-value
K-S stat
ArchTBaseline vs Laser
0.8393
0.2028
0.7652
0.0485
0.5677
0.5714
0.8223
0.0458
ArchTBaseline vs Sham-Laser
0.7378
0.3347
0.8777
0.0486
0.8686
0.1655
0.8777
0.0486
GFPBaseline vs Laser
0.2927
1.0522
0.2032
0.0970
0.7890
0.2676
0.9563
0.0464
GFP Baseline vs Sham-Laser
0.9565
0.0546
0.9971
0.0392
0.8858
0.1436
0.9630
0.0490
Medians (Hz):
Medians (Hz):
ArchTLaser (Baseline) = 1.24
GFPLaser (Baseline) = 1.19
ArchTLaser (Baseline) = 11.29
GFPLaser (Baseline) = 11.49
ArchTSham-Laser (Baseline) = 1.30
GFPSham-Laser (Baseline) = 1.16
ArchTSham-Laser (Baseline) = 12.14
GFPSham-Laser (Baseline) = 11.61
ArchTLaser (Intervention) = 1.19
GFPLaser (Intervention) = 1.40
ArchTLaser (Intervention) = 10.86
GFPLaser (Intervention) = 11.93
ArchT Sham-Laser (Intervention) = 1.29
GFPSham-Laser (Intervention) = 1.19
ArchT Sham-Laser (Intervention) = 11.50
GFPSham-Laser (Intervention) = 11.04
Field width
Information
Mann-Whitney U
K-S
Mann-Whitney U
K-S
P-value
U-value
P-value
K-S stat
P-value
U-value
P-value
K-S stat
There were no significant differences in mean firing rate, max firing rate, field width, or spatial information as a result of MEC disruption. Median values and distributions of medians were tested for significant differences between the Baseline and Intervention periods (Laser or Sham-Laser) in ArchT and GFP rats