Fig. 1

Comparison of the reporter expression driven by different CA2-specific promoters. A Comparison of dual-luciferase-expression efficiency driven by the long (2.3 kb) and short (0.5 kb) fragments of map3k15 promoter and rgs14 promoter (n = 6 mice). The graph showing the M1 (map3k15, 0.5 kb) promoter efficiency was 114 times higher than empty (p < 0.0001), while the M2 (map3k15, 2.3 kb) promoter was 7.125 times more efficient than the empty vector (p < 0.0001) and the rgs14 promoter efficiency was 5.114 times higher than empty (p < 0.0001). Ordinary one-way ANOVA, post-hoc test Bonferroni’s test, each plasmids transfected 6 replicate wells, each column was the average value of firefly luciferase data divided by renialla luciferase after normalizing the pgl4.1 empty value. B Schematics of viral constructs containing different promoters driving Cre expression. C The image of dCA2 co-injected with AAV9/M1-Cre (0.5 kb), AAV9/hSyn-DIO-mcherry (red) and AAV9/CMV-EGFP (green) (n = 6 mice) showing the area of EGFP expression was larger than that of M1-mcherry positive cells (red), and their areas both were significantly larger than CA2 region. D The image of dCA2 injected with AAV9/M2-Cre, AAV9/hSyn-DIO-mcherry (red) and AAV9/CMV-EGFP (green) (n = 5 mice) showing the CMV-EGFP position is basically in CA1, and the number of M2-mcherry positive cells was relatively normal. But M2-mcherry cells were mainly located in DG and CA1 instead of CA2. E The image of dCA2 co-injected with AAV9/RGS14-Cre, AAV9/hSyn-DIO-mcherry (red) and AAV9/CMV-EGFP (green) (n = 4 mice) showing the area of EGFP expression was larger than that of red RGS14-mcherry positive cells, and their areas both were significantly larger than CA2 region. The RGS14-mcherry expression tends to diffuse outside from CA2 to CA3, and CMV-EGFP expression more tend to diffuse to DG. Scale bars: 200 μm (C–E)