Fig. 4

Afterhyperpolarization and spike frequency adaptation of both genotypes after LTD-IE induction. A fAHP of wild-type through time points. Representative AP traces are aligned to its AP thresholds (red circle) for comparison. The value of fAHP at the 4 h time point was significantly lower than all other time points (sham vs. 4 h, F _{1, 28} = 5.12, p = 0.032; 1 h vs. 4 h, F _{1, 23} = 5.72, p = 0.025; 4 h vs. 24 h, F _{1, 30} = 13.1, p = 0.001). B mAHP of wild-type through time points. There were no significant alterations between the time points (F _{3, 53} = 0.524, p = 0.667). C fAHP of STIM1^PKO through time points. Representative AP traces are aligned to its AP thresholds (magenta circles) for comparison. AP onset time was significantly altered at 1 h after training (sham vs. 1 h, F _{1, 29} = 5.68, p = 0.024; 1 h vs. 4 h, F _{1, 29} = 5.52, p = 0.026). D mAHP of STIM1^PKOthrough time points. At the 4 h time point, mAHP was significantly increased than at the 1 h time point (p = 0.017). E The instantaneous frequency of wild-type through time. At the 1 h time point, the instantaneous frequency was significantly reduced compared to sham control (sham vs. 1 h, F _{1, 23} = 9.40, p = 0.005). F ISI ratio of wild-type through time. There were no changes throughout the period (F _{3, 53} = 1.45, p = 0.239). G The instantaneous frequency of STIM1^PKO through time. At the 4 h time point, the instantaneous frequency was significantly higher in comparison to all other groups (sham vs. 4 h, F _{1, 30} = 7.14, p = 0.012; 1 h vs. 4 h, F _{1, 29} = 4.32, p = 0.047; 4 h vs. 24 h, F _{1, 24} = 4.38, p = 0.047). H ISI ratio of STIM1^PKO through time. Similar to instantaneous frequency, the value at the 4 h time point was significantly higher than other time points (F _{3, 53} = 8.22, p < 0.001; sham vs. 4 h, p = 0.001; 1 h vs. 4 h, p < 0.001; 4 h vs. 24 h, p < 0.001). Sample numbers of wild-type (sham n = 15, 1 h n = 10, 4 h n = 15, 24 h n = 17) and STIM1^PKO (sham n = 16, 1 h n = 15, 4 h n = 16, 24 h n = 10) are the same for all panels. Two-way ANOVA was used for A, C, E and G. One-way ANOVA with posthoc Fisher’s LSD test was used for B, D, F and H. The graphs are shown as mean ± SEM. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001