Fig. 4

Chemogenetic inhibition of PrL excitatory neurons attenuated the WMC of WT mice. a Schematic diagram (coronal section) showing the injection target of the virus (hM4Di-mCherry or mCherry) in the PrL. B The minimal injected current to induce action potential (Paired Student’s t test, **p < 0.01). n = 7. c The number of induced action potentials at different current steps (Two-way ANOVA, ****p < 0.0001). d Current–voltage relationship of a representative PrL neuron recorded before and during CNO perfusion. e The WMC of mice in the mCherry and hM4Di group (Unpaired Student’s t test, **p < 0.01). mCherry: n = 5; hM4Di: n = 7. f Percent correct at each capacity level of mice in the mCherry and hM4Di group (Two-way ANOVA, ****p < 0.0001). g Percentage of mice succeeded at each capacity level in the mCherry and hM4Di group (Two-way ANOVA, ****p < 0.0001). h The WMC of mice in the test phase before and during CNO perfusion (Paired Student’s t test, **p < 0.01). n = 7. i Percent correct at each capacity level of mice before and during CNO perfusion (Two-way ANOVA, ****p < 0.0001). j Percentage of mice succeeded at each capacity level before and during CNO perfusion (Two-way ANOVA, ****p < 0.0001). Data are presented as the mean ± SEM