Review



asic2  (Alomone Labs)


Bioz Verified Symbol Alomone Labs is a verified supplier
Bioz Manufacturer Symbol Alomone Labs manufactures this product  
  • Logo
  • About
  • News
  • Press Release
  • Team
  • Advisors
  • Partners
  • Contact
  • Bioz Stars
  • Bioz vStars
  • 93

    Structured Review

    Alomone Labs asic2
    Asic2, supplied by Alomone Labs, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 31 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/asic2/product/Alomone Labs
    Average 93 stars, based on 31 article reviews
    asic2 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    93/100 stars

    Images



    Similar Products

    93
    Alomone Labs asic2
    Asic2, supplied by Alomone Labs, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/asic2/product/Alomone Labs
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    asic2 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    93/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    93
    Alomone Labs anti asic2 antibody
    ( A ) Protocol of mouse tube test assay. Four mice housed together for 2 weeks undergo a round-robin tournament to determine social ranking. ( B ) Typical ranking of a group of one <t>Asic2</t> −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates. ( C ) Average number of winning times in trials 1 and 7. ( D ) Comparison of winning times between WT and Asic2 −/− mice shows that Asic2 −/− mice have higher winning times. **** P < 0.0001, one-way ANOVA. n = 28 cages. ( E ) Typical ranking of three Asic2 −/− mice versus one WT cagemate. ( F ) Average number of winning times in trials 1 and 7. ( G ) Three Asic2 −/− mice exhibit higher winning times than one WT cagemate. **** P < 0.0001; ns, nonsignificant, one-way ANOVA. n = 7 cages. ( H ) Comparison of winning times between groups of one Asic2 −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates and one WT mouse versus three Asic2 −/− cagemates, using data from (B) to (G). *** P = 0.0007, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. ( I ) Comparison of winning times between groups of one Asic1a −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates, and one WT mouse versus three Asic1a −/− cagemates. ns, P = 0.8477, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. n = 7 cages. ( J and K ) Schematic of mouse warm spot test and correlation with tube test rank. P = 0.0118, two-sided Fisher’s exact test. n = 16 cages. ( L and M ) Schematic of mouse urine marking test and correlation with tube test rank. P = 0.0118, two-sided Fisher’s exact test. n = 16 cages.
    Anti Asic2 Antibody, supplied by Alomone Labs, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/anti asic2 antibody/product/Alomone Labs
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    anti asic2 antibody - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    93/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    90
    Thermo Fisher human asic2a cdna clone 30915358
    ( A ) Protocol of mouse tube test assay. Four mice housed together for 2 weeks undergo a round-robin tournament to determine social ranking. ( B ) Typical ranking of a group of one <t>Asic2</t> −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates. ( C ) Average number of winning times in trials 1 and 7. ( D ) Comparison of winning times between WT and Asic2 −/− mice shows that Asic2 −/− mice have higher winning times. **** P < 0.0001, one-way ANOVA. n = 28 cages. ( E ) Typical ranking of three Asic2 −/− mice versus one WT cagemate. ( F ) Average number of winning times in trials 1 and 7. ( G ) Three Asic2 −/− mice exhibit higher winning times than one WT cagemate. **** P < 0.0001; ns, nonsignificant, one-way ANOVA. n = 7 cages. ( H ) Comparison of winning times between groups of one Asic2 −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates and one WT mouse versus three Asic2 −/− cagemates, using data from (B) to (G). *** P = 0.0007, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. ( I ) Comparison of winning times between groups of one Asic1a −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates, and one WT mouse versus three Asic1a −/− cagemates. ns, P = 0.8477, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. n = 7 cages. ( J and K ) Schematic of mouse warm spot test and correlation with tube test rank. P = 0.0118, two-sided Fisher’s exact test. n = 16 cages. ( L and M ) Schematic of mouse urine marking test and correlation with tube test rank. P = 0.0118, two-sided Fisher’s exact test. n = 16 cages.
    Human Asic2a Cdna Clone 30915358, supplied by Thermo Fisher, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/human asic2a cdna clone 30915358/product/Thermo Fisher
    Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    human asic2a cdna clone 30915358 - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    90/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    93
    Alomone Labs anti asic2a antibody
    ( A ) Protocol of mouse tube test assay. Four mice housed together for 2 weeks undergo a round-robin tournament to determine social ranking. ( B ) Typical ranking of a group of one <t>Asic2</t> −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates. ( C ) Average number of winning times in trials 1 and 7. ( D ) Comparison of winning times between WT and Asic2 −/− mice shows that Asic2 −/− mice have higher winning times. **** P < 0.0001, one-way ANOVA. n = 28 cages. ( E ) Typical ranking of three Asic2 −/− mice versus one WT cagemate. ( F ) Average number of winning times in trials 1 and 7. ( G ) Three Asic2 −/− mice exhibit higher winning times than one WT cagemate. **** P < 0.0001; ns, nonsignificant, one-way ANOVA. n = 7 cages. ( H ) Comparison of winning times between groups of one Asic2 −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates and one WT mouse versus three Asic2 −/− cagemates, using data from (B) to (G). *** P = 0.0007, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. ( I ) Comparison of winning times between groups of one Asic1a −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates, and one WT mouse versus three Asic1a −/− cagemates. ns, P = 0.8477, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. n = 7 cages. ( J and K ) Schematic of mouse warm spot test and correlation with tube test rank. P = 0.0118, two-sided Fisher’s exact test. n = 16 cages. ( L and M ) Schematic of mouse urine marking test and correlation with tube test rank. P = 0.0118, two-sided Fisher’s exact test. n = 16 cages.
    Anti Asic2a Antibody, supplied by Alomone Labs, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/anti asic2a antibody/product/Alomone Labs
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    anti asic2a antibody - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    93/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    93
    Alomone Labs anti asic2a
    ( A ) Protocol of mouse tube test assay. Four mice housed together for 2 weeks undergo a round-robin tournament to determine social ranking. ( B ) Typical ranking of a group of one <t>Asic2</t> −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates. ( C ) Average number of winning times in trials 1 and 7. ( D ) Comparison of winning times between WT and Asic2 −/− mice shows that Asic2 −/− mice have higher winning times. **** P < 0.0001, one-way ANOVA. n = 28 cages. ( E ) Typical ranking of three Asic2 −/− mice versus one WT cagemate. ( F ) Average number of winning times in trials 1 and 7. ( G ) Three Asic2 −/− mice exhibit higher winning times than one WT cagemate. **** P < 0.0001; ns, nonsignificant, one-way ANOVA. n = 7 cages. ( H ) Comparison of winning times between groups of one Asic2 −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates and one WT mouse versus three Asic2 −/− cagemates, using data from (B) to (G). *** P = 0.0007, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. ( I ) Comparison of winning times between groups of one Asic1a −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates, and one WT mouse versus three Asic1a −/− cagemates. ns, P = 0.8477, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. n = 7 cages. ( J and K ) Schematic of mouse warm spot test and correlation with tube test rank. P = 0.0118, two-sided Fisher’s exact test. n = 16 cages. ( L and M ) Schematic of mouse urine marking test and correlation with tube test rank. P = 0.0118, two-sided Fisher’s exact test. n = 16 cages.
    Anti Asic2a, supplied by Alomone Labs, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/anti asic2a/product/Alomone Labs
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    anti asic2a - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    93/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    93
    Alomone Labs asic2a
    ( A ) Protocol of mouse tube test assay. Four mice housed together for 2 weeks undergo a round-robin tournament to determine social ranking. ( B ) Typical ranking of a group of one <t>Asic2</t> −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates. ( C ) Average number of winning times in trials 1 and 7. ( D ) Comparison of winning times between WT and Asic2 −/− mice shows that Asic2 −/− mice have higher winning times. **** P < 0.0001, one-way ANOVA. n = 28 cages. ( E ) Typical ranking of three Asic2 −/− mice versus one WT cagemate. ( F ) Average number of winning times in trials 1 and 7. ( G ) Three Asic2 −/− mice exhibit higher winning times than one WT cagemate. **** P < 0.0001; ns, nonsignificant, one-way ANOVA. n = 7 cages. ( H ) Comparison of winning times between groups of one Asic2 −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates and one WT mouse versus three Asic2 −/− cagemates, using data from (B) to (G). *** P = 0.0007, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. ( I ) Comparison of winning times between groups of one Asic1a −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates, and one WT mouse versus three Asic1a −/− cagemates. ns, P = 0.8477, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. n = 7 cages. ( J and K ) Schematic of mouse warm spot test and correlation with tube test rank. P = 0.0118, two-sided Fisher’s exact test. n = 16 cages. ( L and M ) Schematic of mouse urine marking test and correlation with tube test rank. P = 0.0118, two-sided Fisher’s exact test. n = 16 cages.
    Asic2a, supplied by Alomone Labs, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/asic2a/product/Alomone Labs
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    asic2a - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    93/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    93
    Alomone Labs antiasic2a
    ( A ) Protocol of mouse tube test assay. Four mice housed together for 2 weeks undergo a round-robin tournament to determine social ranking. ( B ) Typical ranking of a group of one <t>Asic2</t> −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates. ( C ) Average number of winning times in trials 1 and 7. ( D ) Comparison of winning times between WT and Asic2 −/− mice shows that Asic2 −/− mice have higher winning times. **** P < 0.0001, one-way ANOVA. n = 28 cages. ( E ) Typical ranking of three Asic2 −/− mice versus one WT cagemate. ( F ) Average number of winning times in trials 1 and 7. ( G ) Three Asic2 −/− mice exhibit higher winning times than one WT cagemate. **** P < 0.0001; ns, nonsignificant, one-way ANOVA. n = 7 cages. ( H ) Comparison of winning times between groups of one Asic2 −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates and one WT mouse versus three Asic2 −/− cagemates, using data from (B) to (G). *** P = 0.0007, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. ( I ) Comparison of winning times between groups of one Asic1a −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates, and one WT mouse versus three Asic1a −/− cagemates. ns, P = 0.8477, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. n = 7 cages. ( J and K ) Schematic of mouse warm spot test and correlation with tube test rank. P = 0.0118, two-sided Fisher’s exact test. n = 16 cages. ( L and M ) Schematic of mouse urine marking test and correlation with tube test rank. P = 0.0118, two-sided Fisher’s exact test. n = 16 cages.
    Antiasic2a, supplied by Alomone Labs, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 93/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
    https://www.bioz.com/result/antiasic2a/product/Alomone Labs
    Average 93 stars, based on 1 article reviews
    antiasic2a - by Bioz Stars, 2026-03
    93/100 stars
      Buy from Supplier

    Image Search Results


    ( A ) Protocol of mouse tube test assay. Four mice housed together for 2 weeks undergo a round-robin tournament to determine social ranking. ( B ) Typical ranking of a group of one Asic2 −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates. ( C ) Average number of winning times in trials 1 and 7. ( D ) Comparison of winning times between WT and Asic2 −/− mice shows that Asic2 −/− mice have higher winning times. **** P < 0.0001, one-way ANOVA. n = 28 cages. ( E ) Typical ranking of three Asic2 −/− mice versus one WT cagemate. ( F ) Average number of winning times in trials 1 and 7. ( G ) Three Asic2 −/− mice exhibit higher winning times than one WT cagemate. **** P < 0.0001; ns, nonsignificant, one-way ANOVA. n = 7 cages. ( H ) Comparison of winning times between groups of one Asic2 −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates and one WT mouse versus three Asic2 −/− cagemates, using data from (B) to (G). *** P = 0.0007, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. ( I ) Comparison of winning times between groups of one Asic1a −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates, and one WT mouse versus three Asic1a −/− cagemates. ns, P = 0.8477, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. n = 7 cages. ( J and K ) Schematic of mouse warm spot test and correlation with tube test rank. P = 0.0118, two-sided Fisher’s exact test. n = 16 cages. ( L and M ) Schematic of mouse urine marking test and correlation with tube test rank. P = 0.0118, two-sided Fisher’s exact test. n = 16 cages.

    Journal: Science Advances

    Article Title: Mice lacking acid-sensing ion channel 2 in the medial prefrontal cortex exhibit social dominance

    doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adn7573

    Figure Lengend Snippet: ( A ) Protocol of mouse tube test assay. Four mice housed together for 2 weeks undergo a round-robin tournament to determine social ranking. ( B ) Typical ranking of a group of one Asic2 −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates. ( C ) Average number of winning times in trials 1 and 7. ( D ) Comparison of winning times between WT and Asic2 −/− mice shows that Asic2 −/− mice have higher winning times. **** P < 0.0001, one-way ANOVA. n = 28 cages. ( E ) Typical ranking of three Asic2 −/− mice versus one WT cagemate. ( F ) Average number of winning times in trials 1 and 7. ( G ) Three Asic2 −/− mice exhibit higher winning times than one WT cagemate. **** P < 0.0001; ns, nonsignificant, one-way ANOVA. n = 7 cages. ( H ) Comparison of winning times between groups of one Asic2 −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates and one WT mouse versus three Asic2 −/− cagemates, using data from (B) to (G). *** P = 0.0007, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. ( I ) Comparison of winning times between groups of one Asic1a −/− mouse versus three WT cagemates, and one WT mouse versus three Asic1a −/− cagemates. ns, P = 0.8477, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. n = 7 cages. ( J and K ) Schematic of mouse warm spot test and correlation with tube test rank. P = 0.0118, two-sided Fisher’s exact test. n = 16 cages. ( L and M ) Schematic of mouse urine marking test and correlation with tube test rank. P = 0.0118, two-sided Fisher’s exact test. n = 16 cages.

    Article Snippet: Primary antibodies used in this study are anti-ASIC1a antibody (Alomone Labs, no. ASC-014), anti-ASIC2 antibody (Alomone Labs, no. ASC-012), GluA1 polyclonal antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, no. PA5-99527), NMDAR2B polyclonal antibody (Innovative Research, no. 71-8600), PKA alpha antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, no. MA5-37857), and β-actin antibody (Cell Signaling Technology, no. 4967).

    Techniques: Comparison, Two Tailed Test, Spot Test

    ( A ) Recordings of acid-induced currents in the mPFC slice. ( B to D ) pH-dependent ASIC currents in WT (B) ( n = 5 to 13 cells per pH dose, from four mice), Asic1a −/− (C) ( n = 5 to 21 cells per pH dose, from four mice) and Asic2 −/− (D) neurons ( n = 5 to 12 cells per pH dose, from 4 mice). ( E ) Normalized ASIC currents in WT (black) and Asic2 −/− (red) neurons. ( F ) Current density at pH 5.0 in WT and Asic2 −/− neurons. ns, P = 0.2828. ( G ) Desensitization decay times (τ), ** P = 0.0058, n = 16 cells per four mice. ( H ) Normalized ASIC current per unit time. **** P < 0.0001, n = 15 cells per four mice. ( I ) Representative Western blot data illustrating the expression of ASIC1a and ASIC2 in WT mice with different rankings in the tube test. ( J ) Average expression data for ASIC1a and ASIC2. ns, P = 0.1592, ** P < 0.007. ( K and L ) Correlation curves depicting expressions of ASIC1a [Pearson correlation coefficient ( r ) = −0.23, P = 0.18, ns] and ASIC2 ( r = −0.80, ** P = 0.005) in relation to social rankings, n = 9 mice in each ranking group. ( M ) Representative ASIC currents in neurons from winner (α) and loser (δ) mice. ( N and O ) Average current density and τ of ASIC currents. ns, P = 0.4211; * P = 0.0113, n = 21 cells per four mice. ( P ) pH-dependent ASIC currents in WT mice were analyzed to determine pH 50 values, obtained by best-fitting with the Hill equation. ( Q ) Average pH 50 between neurons in α and δ mice. **** P < 0.0001, n = 13 to 15 cells per four mice.

    Journal: Science Advances

    Article Title: Mice lacking acid-sensing ion channel 2 in the medial prefrontal cortex exhibit social dominance

    doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adn7573

    Figure Lengend Snippet: ( A ) Recordings of acid-induced currents in the mPFC slice. ( B to D ) pH-dependent ASIC currents in WT (B) ( n = 5 to 13 cells per pH dose, from four mice), Asic1a −/− (C) ( n = 5 to 21 cells per pH dose, from four mice) and Asic2 −/− (D) neurons ( n = 5 to 12 cells per pH dose, from 4 mice). ( E ) Normalized ASIC currents in WT (black) and Asic2 −/− (red) neurons. ( F ) Current density at pH 5.0 in WT and Asic2 −/− neurons. ns, P = 0.2828. ( G ) Desensitization decay times (τ), ** P = 0.0058, n = 16 cells per four mice. ( H ) Normalized ASIC current per unit time. **** P < 0.0001, n = 15 cells per four mice. ( I ) Representative Western blot data illustrating the expression of ASIC1a and ASIC2 in WT mice with different rankings in the tube test. ( J ) Average expression data for ASIC1a and ASIC2. ns, P = 0.1592, ** P < 0.007. ( K and L ) Correlation curves depicting expressions of ASIC1a [Pearson correlation coefficient ( r ) = −0.23, P = 0.18, ns] and ASIC2 ( r = −0.80, ** P = 0.005) in relation to social rankings, n = 9 mice in each ranking group. ( M ) Representative ASIC currents in neurons from winner (α) and loser (δ) mice. ( N and O ) Average current density and τ of ASIC currents. ns, P = 0.4211; * P = 0.0113, n = 21 cells per four mice. ( P ) pH-dependent ASIC currents in WT mice were analyzed to determine pH 50 values, obtained by best-fitting with the Hill equation. ( Q ) Average pH 50 between neurons in α and δ mice. **** P < 0.0001, n = 13 to 15 cells per four mice.

    Article Snippet: Primary antibodies used in this study are anti-ASIC1a antibody (Alomone Labs, no. ASC-014), anti-ASIC2 antibody (Alomone Labs, no. ASC-012), GluA1 polyclonal antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, no. PA5-99527), NMDAR2B polyclonal antibody (Innovative Research, no. 71-8600), PKA alpha antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, no. MA5-37857), and β-actin antibody (Cell Signaling Technology, no. 4967).

    Techniques: Western Blot, Expressing

    ( A ) Schematic showing the injection of AAV 2 -CMV-mASIC2 into the mPFC in Asic2 −/− mice. ( B ) Left, a representative image of the AAV 2 -mASIC2 injection site and neurons expressing mASIC2; middle-right, representative recording of acid-induced ASIC-like currents in the GFP positive and negative neurons. ( C ) The representative comparison of acid-induced currents among WT, Asic2 −/− (non-GFP cells), and AAV-mASIC2 neurons (GFP positive cells). ( D and E ) Comparison of desensitization decay times (D) and density (E) of the acid-induced currents in the neurons in (C). WT versus Asic2 −/− , ** P = 0.0012, Asic2 −/− versus AAV-mASIC2, ** P = 0.0082; AAV-mASIC2 versus AAV-sham, * P = 0.0129, ns, P = 0.6763, one-way ANOVA. n = 12 to 15 cells from four mice. ( F ) Schematic showing the tube test protocol before and after AAV-mediated expression of ASIC2 in the mPFC of Asic2 −/− mice. ( G ) Representative result of ranking in the tube test following the restoration of ASIC2 in mPFC neurons of Asic2 −/− mice. ( H ) Average winning times in the tube test after restoring ASIC2 in mPFC neurons of Asic2 −/− mice. ( I ) Comparison of winning times between the group with restored ASIC2 in Asic2 −/− mice and one of its WT subordinates. ** P = 0.0092; ns, P = 0.3652, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. n = 9 cages.

    Journal: Science Advances

    Article Title: Mice lacking acid-sensing ion channel 2 in the medial prefrontal cortex exhibit social dominance

    doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adn7573

    Figure Lengend Snippet: ( A ) Schematic showing the injection of AAV 2 -CMV-mASIC2 into the mPFC in Asic2 −/− mice. ( B ) Left, a representative image of the AAV 2 -mASIC2 injection site and neurons expressing mASIC2; middle-right, representative recording of acid-induced ASIC-like currents in the GFP positive and negative neurons. ( C ) The representative comparison of acid-induced currents among WT, Asic2 −/− (non-GFP cells), and AAV-mASIC2 neurons (GFP positive cells). ( D and E ) Comparison of desensitization decay times (D) and density (E) of the acid-induced currents in the neurons in (C). WT versus Asic2 −/− , ** P = 0.0012, Asic2 −/− versus AAV-mASIC2, ** P = 0.0082; AAV-mASIC2 versus AAV-sham, * P = 0.0129, ns, P = 0.6763, one-way ANOVA. n = 12 to 15 cells from four mice. ( F ) Schematic showing the tube test protocol before and after AAV-mediated expression of ASIC2 in the mPFC of Asic2 −/− mice. ( G ) Representative result of ranking in the tube test following the restoration of ASIC2 in mPFC neurons of Asic2 −/− mice. ( H ) Average winning times in the tube test after restoring ASIC2 in mPFC neurons of Asic2 −/− mice. ( I ) Comparison of winning times between the group with restored ASIC2 in Asic2 −/− mice and one of its WT subordinates. ** P = 0.0092; ns, P = 0.3652, two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test. n = 9 cages.

    Article Snippet: Primary antibodies used in this study are anti-ASIC1a antibody (Alomone Labs, no. ASC-014), anti-ASIC2 antibody (Alomone Labs, no. ASC-012), GluA1 polyclonal antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, no. PA5-99527), NMDAR2B polyclonal antibody (Innovative Research, no. 71-8600), PKA alpha antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, no. MA5-37857), and β-actin antibody (Cell Signaling Technology, no. 4967).

    Techniques: Injection, Expressing, Comparison, Two Tailed Test

    ( A ) Recording site schematic in the mPFC. ( B to D ) PPR recorded with 50- to 500-ms interstimulus intervals. Left: Representative PPR traces at 50 ms in WT and Asic2 −/− mice before and after social rankings. Right: Average PPR plotted against intervals. (C) * P = 0.0433; (D) ** P = 0.0088, 0.0044, * P = 0.0481, n = 10 cells per four mice. ( E ) Representative AMPAR-EPSCs (−80 mV) and NMDAR-EPSCs (+60 mV) in WT and Asic2 −/− neurons. ( F ) Average AMPAR/NMDAR ratios before and after social rankings. Current amplitudes measured 70 ms after onset. ns, P = 0.6117; * P = 0.0470; *** P = 0.0006. n = 22 to 29 cells per five mice. ( G and H ) mEPSCs in the groups of WT versus WT, and WT versus Asic2 −/− mice after social rankings. Upper: Representative mEPSC traces. Lower: Cumulative distributions of mEPSC amplitudes and interevent intervals. (G) * P = 0.0342; ns, P = 0.4768; (H) * P = 0.0109, 0.0065, n = 18 cells per four mice. ( I ) AMPAR current rectification in WT and Asic2 −/− neurons before social rankings. Left: Current-voltage relationships of AMPARs. Inset: Representative AMPAR-EPSC traces at −80 mV and +60 mV. NMDARs blocked with 100 μM d -APV. Right: AMPAR current rectification index (−80 mV/+60 mV). ns, P = 0.5913. n = 18 cells per four mice. ( J and K ) AMPAR current rectification of WT versus WT, and WT versus Asic2 −/− neurons after social rankings. ns, P = 0.4467; *** P = 0.0003, n = 22 cells per four mice. ( L to N ) Time course of 50 μM NASPM effect on EPSCs in mPFC neurons of WT versus WT (M) and Asic2 −/− versus WT (N) mice groups before (L) and after (M and N) social rankings. NMDARs blocked with 100 μM d -APV. Right: NASPM-sensitive EPSC comparison. ns, P = 0.9864, P = 0.1059; **** P < 0.0001, n = 10 cells per four mice. All comparisons by two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test.

    Journal: Science Advances

    Article Title: Mice lacking acid-sensing ion channel 2 in the medial prefrontal cortex exhibit social dominance

    doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adn7573

    Figure Lengend Snippet: ( A ) Recording site schematic in the mPFC. ( B to D ) PPR recorded with 50- to 500-ms interstimulus intervals. Left: Representative PPR traces at 50 ms in WT and Asic2 −/− mice before and after social rankings. Right: Average PPR plotted against intervals. (C) * P = 0.0433; (D) ** P = 0.0088, 0.0044, * P = 0.0481, n = 10 cells per four mice. ( E ) Representative AMPAR-EPSCs (−80 mV) and NMDAR-EPSCs (+60 mV) in WT and Asic2 −/− neurons. ( F ) Average AMPAR/NMDAR ratios before and after social rankings. Current amplitudes measured 70 ms after onset. ns, P = 0.6117; * P = 0.0470; *** P = 0.0006. n = 22 to 29 cells per five mice. ( G and H ) mEPSCs in the groups of WT versus WT, and WT versus Asic2 −/− mice after social rankings. Upper: Representative mEPSC traces. Lower: Cumulative distributions of mEPSC amplitudes and interevent intervals. (G) * P = 0.0342; ns, P = 0.4768; (H) * P = 0.0109, 0.0065, n = 18 cells per four mice. ( I ) AMPAR current rectification in WT and Asic2 −/− neurons before social rankings. Left: Current-voltage relationships of AMPARs. Inset: Representative AMPAR-EPSC traces at −80 mV and +60 mV. NMDARs blocked with 100 μM d -APV. Right: AMPAR current rectification index (−80 mV/+60 mV). ns, P = 0.5913. n = 18 cells per four mice. ( J and K ) AMPAR current rectification of WT versus WT, and WT versus Asic2 −/− neurons after social rankings. ns, P = 0.4467; *** P = 0.0003, n = 22 cells per four mice. ( L to N ) Time course of 50 μM NASPM effect on EPSCs in mPFC neurons of WT versus WT (M) and Asic2 −/− versus WT (N) mice groups before (L) and after (M and N) social rankings. NMDARs blocked with 100 μM d -APV. Right: NASPM-sensitive EPSC comparison. ns, P = 0.9864, P = 0.1059; **** P < 0.0001, n = 10 cells per four mice. All comparisons by two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test.

    Article Snippet: Primary antibodies used in this study are anti-ASIC1a antibody (Alomone Labs, no. ASC-014), anti-ASIC2 antibody (Alomone Labs, no. ASC-012), GluA1 polyclonal antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, no. PA5-99527), NMDAR2B polyclonal antibody (Innovative Research, no. 71-8600), PKA alpha antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, no. MA5-37857), and β-actin antibody (Cell Signaling Technology, no. 4967).

    Techniques: Comparison, Two Tailed Test

    ( A ) Dendritic and spine morphology of mPFC neurons using Alexa 568 dye. ( B ) Sholl analysis for dendritic branches. Left: Parameters measured with Sholl shells from the cell body. Right: Nodes (blue dots) are branching points, and intersections (yellow dots) are where processes intersect Sholl shells. ( C ) Reconstructed mPFC neurons from WT winner and loser mice. ( D to G ) Sholl analysis of dendritic intersections (D), ** P = 0.0019; number of branches (E), * P = 0.0314; branch length (F), ns, P = 0.1465; and node numbers (G), ns, P = 0.0717. n = 6 to 8 slices per four mice. ( H ) Reconstructed mPFC neurons from Asic2 −/− winner and WT loser mice. ( I to L ) Sholl analysis: dendritic intersections (I) **** P < 0.0001; branches (J) ** P = 0.0042; branch length (K) * P = 0.0409; and nodes (L) * P = 0.0412. n = 6 to 8 slices per four mice. ( M ) Spine structures in mPFC neurons from WT winner and loser mice. ( N ) Spine density comparison: mature, **** P < 0.0001; immature, ** P = 0.001; total spines, ns, P = 0.7656. ( O ) Immature spine density (stubby, thin, and filopodia) in WT winner and loser mice. **** P < 0.0001; * P = 0.0253; ns, P = 0.9336. ( P ) Mature-to-immature spine density ratio in WT winner and loser mice, **** P < 0.0001. n = 27 to 37 neurons per four mice. ( Q ) Spine structures in mPFC neurons from Asic2 −/− winner and WT loser mice. ( R ) Spine density comparison: mature, **** P < 0.0001; immature, **** P < 0.0001; total spines, ** P = 0.0026. ( S ) Immature spine density in Asic2 −/− winner and WT loser mice, **** P < 0.0001; ns, P = 0.0624, 0.6637. ( T ) Mature-to-immature spine density ratio in Asic2 −/− winner and WT loser mice, **** P < 0.0001. n = 27 neurons per four mice. All comparisons by two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test.

    Journal: Science Advances

    Article Title: Mice lacking acid-sensing ion channel 2 in the medial prefrontal cortex exhibit social dominance

    doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adn7573

    Figure Lengend Snippet: ( A ) Dendritic and spine morphology of mPFC neurons using Alexa 568 dye. ( B ) Sholl analysis for dendritic branches. Left: Parameters measured with Sholl shells from the cell body. Right: Nodes (blue dots) are branching points, and intersections (yellow dots) are where processes intersect Sholl shells. ( C ) Reconstructed mPFC neurons from WT winner and loser mice. ( D to G ) Sholl analysis of dendritic intersections (D), ** P = 0.0019; number of branches (E), * P = 0.0314; branch length (F), ns, P = 0.1465; and node numbers (G), ns, P = 0.0717. n = 6 to 8 slices per four mice. ( H ) Reconstructed mPFC neurons from Asic2 −/− winner and WT loser mice. ( I to L ) Sholl analysis: dendritic intersections (I) **** P < 0.0001; branches (J) ** P = 0.0042; branch length (K) * P = 0.0409; and nodes (L) * P = 0.0412. n = 6 to 8 slices per four mice. ( M ) Spine structures in mPFC neurons from WT winner and loser mice. ( N ) Spine density comparison: mature, **** P < 0.0001; immature, ** P = 0.001; total spines, ns, P = 0.7656. ( O ) Immature spine density (stubby, thin, and filopodia) in WT winner and loser mice. **** P < 0.0001; * P = 0.0253; ns, P = 0.9336. ( P ) Mature-to-immature spine density ratio in WT winner and loser mice, **** P < 0.0001. n = 27 to 37 neurons per four mice. ( Q ) Spine structures in mPFC neurons from Asic2 −/− winner and WT loser mice. ( R ) Spine density comparison: mature, **** P < 0.0001; immature, **** P < 0.0001; total spines, ** P = 0.0026. ( S ) Immature spine density in Asic2 −/− winner and WT loser mice, **** P < 0.0001; ns, P = 0.0624, 0.6637. ( T ) Mature-to-immature spine density ratio in Asic2 −/− winner and WT loser mice, **** P < 0.0001. n = 27 neurons per four mice. All comparisons by two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test.

    Article Snippet: Primary antibodies used in this study are anti-ASIC1a antibody (Alomone Labs, no. ASC-014), anti-ASIC2 antibody (Alomone Labs, no. ASC-012), GluA1 polyclonal antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, no. PA5-99527), NMDAR2B polyclonal antibody (Innovative Research, no. 71-8600), PKA alpha antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, no. MA5-37857), and β-actin antibody (Cell Signaling Technology, no. 4967).

    Techniques: Comparison, Two Tailed Test

    ( A ) Heatmap of substrate phosphorylation levels for STK in Asic2 −/− brain samples versus WT controls. ( B ) Global phosphorylation level differences between Asic2 −/− and WT brain samples. *** P = 0.0001 by paired two-tailed Student’s t test. n = 86 peptides. ( C ) Reverse KRSA plots mapping peptides to upstream kinases in Asic2 −/− versus WT brains. ( D ) Quantification of PKA and AKT ( Z > 2) using histogram peacock plots. ( E ) Waterfall plot of differentially identified kinases in Asic2 −/− brain samples versus WT controls. Red dots indicate increased or decreased representation for each kinase. ( F ) piNET analysis identified downstream proteins activated by STK pathways, highlighting PKA (PRKACA) and AKT1 pathways. Selected kinases (red nodes) and downstream regulators (blue nodes) are connected by green edges. ( G ) Asic2 −/− molecular interaction network. Functionally enriched protein-protein interaction network of upstream kinase “hits” (red) and interpolated hidden nodes (yellow) identified by Kinograte R software. n = 5 mice per group. ( H ) mRNA expression of PKA (PRKACA) via RT-qPCR in Asic2 −/− versus WT mice mPFC. * P = 0.0217 by unpaired two-tailed Student’s t test. n = 14 mice per group. ( I ) Basal cAMP level measured by ELISA in Asic2 −/− versus WT mice mPFC. ** P = 0.0039 by unpaired two-tailed Student’s t test. n = 6 to 9 mice per group. ( J ) mRNA expression of BDNF via RT-qPCR in Asic2 −/− versus WT mice mPFC. ** P = 0.0062 by unpaired two-tailed Student’s t test. n = 12 mice per group.

    Journal: Science Advances

    Article Title: Mice lacking acid-sensing ion channel 2 in the medial prefrontal cortex exhibit social dominance

    doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adn7573

    Figure Lengend Snippet: ( A ) Heatmap of substrate phosphorylation levels for STK in Asic2 −/− brain samples versus WT controls. ( B ) Global phosphorylation level differences between Asic2 −/− and WT brain samples. *** P = 0.0001 by paired two-tailed Student’s t test. n = 86 peptides. ( C ) Reverse KRSA plots mapping peptides to upstream kinases in Asic2 −/− versus WT brains. ( D ) Quantification of PKA and AKT ( Z > 2) using histogram peacock plots. ( E ) Waterfall plot of differentially identified kinases in Asic2 −/− brain samples versus WT controls. Red dots indicate increased or decreased representation for each kinase. ( F ) piNET analysis identified downstream proteins activated by STK pathways, highlighting PKA (PRKACA) and AKT1 pathways. Selected kinases (red nodes) and downstream regulators (blue nodes) are connected by green edges. ( G ) Asic2 −/− molecular interaction network. Functionally enriched protein-protein interaction network of upstream kinase “hits” (red) and interpolated hidden nodes (yellow) identified by Kinograte R software. n = 5 mice per group. ( H ) mRNA expression of PKA (PRKACA) via RT-qPCR in Asic2 −/− versus WT mice mPFC. * P = 0.0217 by unpaired two-tailed Student’s t test. n = 14 mice per group. ( I ) Basal cAMP level measured by ELISA in Asic2 −/− versus WT mice mPFC. ** P = 0.0039 by unpaired two-tailed Student’s t test. n = 6 to 9 mice per group. ( J ) mRNA expression of BDNF via RT-qPCR in Asic2 −/− versus WT mice mPFC. ** P = 0.0062 by unpaired two-tailed Student’s t test. n = 12 mice per group.

    Article Snippet: Primary antibodies used in this study are anti-ASIC1a antibody (Alomone Labs, no. ASC-014), anti-ASIC2 antibody (Alomone Labs, no. ASC-012), GluA1 polyclonal antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, no. PA5-99527), NMDAR2B polyclonal antibody (Innovative Research, no. 71-8600), PKA alpha antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, no. MA5-37857), and β-actin antibody (Cell Signaling Technology, no. 4967).

    Techniques: Two Tailed Test, Software, Expressing, Quantitative RT-PCR, Enzyme-linked Immunosorbent Assay

    ( A ) Schematic showing the AAV 2 -hSyn-Cre injection into the mPFC of Asic2 f/f mice. ( B ) Representative immunofluorescence image depicting the AAV 2 -hSyn-Cre injection site. ( C ) Representative immunofluorescence image demonstrating colocalization of ASIC2 (red) and AAV 2 -hSyn-Cre/AAV 2 -hSyn-GFP (green). Please note the presence of colocalization indicated by arrows in the AAV 2 -hSyn-GFP control group (upper), whereas such colocalization is absent in the AAV 2 -hSyn-Cre group (lower). ( D ) Western blot results show ASIC2 protein levels in the AAV 2 -hSyn-Cre and AAV 2 -hSyn-GFP groups. * P = 0.0472. n = 6 mice. ( E ) Schematic showing procedures of the tube test, AAV-hSyn-Cre injection into the mPFC of Asic2 f/f mice, and the EPSC recordings. ( F ) Summarized results of ranking in the tube test before and after virus injections. ( G ) Average percentage of winning times in the tube test before and after AAV 2 -hsyn-Cre and AAV 2 -hSyn-GFP injections. *** P = 0.0007, n = 9 cages. ( H ) Representative mEPSC traces of Asic2 f/f mPFC neurons in AAV 2 -hsyn-Cre and AAV 2 -hSyn-GFP groups. ( I and J ) Cumulative distributions of mEPSC amplitudes.* P = 0.0088. ( K and L ) Cumulative distributions of mEPSC interevent intervals, * P = 0.0172. n = 10 cells from four mice per group. ( M ) Representative mIPSC traces of Asic2 f/f mPFC neurons in AAV 2 -hsyn-Cre and AAV 2 -hSyn-GFP groups. ( N and O ) Cumulative distributions of mIPSC amplitudes, ns, P = 0.8873. ( P and Q ) Cumulative distributions of mEPSC interevent intervals, * P = 0.0115. n = 9 cells from four mice per group. All comparisons by two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test.

    Journal: Science Advances

    Article Title: Mice lacking acid-sensing ion channel 2 in the medial prefrontal cortex exhibit social dominance

    doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adn7573

    Figure Lengend Snippet: ( A ) Schematic showing the AAV 2 -hSyn-Cre injection into the mPFC of Asic2 f/f mice. ( B ) Representative immunofluorescence image depicting the AAV 2 -hSyn-Cre injection site. ( C ) Representative immunofluorescence image demonstrating colocalization of ASIC2 (red) and AAV 2 -hSyn-Cre/AAV 2 -hSyn-GFP (green). Please note the presence of colocalization indicated by arrows in the AAV 2 -hSyn-GFP control group (upper), whereas such colocalization is absent in the AAV 2 -hSyn-Cre group (lower). ( D ) Western blot results show ASIC2 protein levels in the AAV 2 -hSyn-Cre and AAV 2 -hSyn-GFP groups. * P = 0.0472. n = 6 mice. ( E ) Schematic showing procedures of the tube test, AAV-hSyn-Cre injection into the mPFC of Asic2 f/f mice, and the EPSC recordings. ( F ) Summarized results of ranking in the tube test before and after virus injections. ( G ) Average percentage of winning times in the tube test before and after AAV 2 -hsyn-Cre and AAV 2 -hSyn-GFP injections. *** P = 0.0007, n = 9 cages. ( H ) Representative mEPSC traces of Asic2 f/f mPFC neurons in AAV 2 -hsyn-Cre and AAV 2 -hSyn-GFP groups. ( I and J ) Cumulative distributions of mEPSC amplitudes.* P = 0.0088. ( K and L ) Cumulative distributions of mEPSC interevent intervals, * P = 0.0172. n = 10 cells from four mice per group. ( M ) Representative mIPSC traces of Asic2 f/f mPFC neurons in AAV 2 -hsyn-Cre and AAV 2 -hSyn-GFP groups. ( N and O ) Cumulative distributions of mIPSC amplitudes, ns, P = 0.8873. ( P and Q ) Cumulative distributions of mEPSC interevent intervals, * P = 0.0115. n = 9 cells from four mice per group. All comparisons by two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test.

    Article Snippet: Primary antibodies used in this study are anti-ASIC1a antibody (Alomone Labs, no. ASC-014), anti-ASIC2 antibody (Alomone Labs, no. ASC-012), GluA1 polyclonal antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, no. PA5-99527), NMDAR2B polyclonal antibody (Innovative Research, no. 71-8600), PKA alpha antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, no. MA5-37857), and β-actin antibody (Cell Signaling Technology, no. 4967).

    Techniques: Injection, Immunofluorescence, Control, Western Blot, Virus, Two Tailed Test

    ( A ) Generation of ASIC2-cKO mice in excitatory neurons (ASIC2-Vglut1-cKO) by crossbreeding Asic2 f/f mice with Vglut1-ires2-Cre mice. ( B ) Immunofluorescence images showing the absence of ASIC2 expression (green) in mPFC excitatory neurons labeled with N -methyl d -aspartate receptor subtype 2B (NR2B) (red). Inset highlights the lack of ASIC2 and NR2B colocalization. ( C ) One ASIC2-Vglut1-cKO and three WT mice cohoused for 2 weeks, followed by the tube test tournament to establish social rankings. Data from six cages per group summarized. ( D ) Comparison of time to stable rankings between ASIC2-Vglut1-cKO and WT subordinate mice. *** P = 0.0002, n = 6 cages. ( E ) Schematic of AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre injection into Asic2 f/f mouse mPFC neurons. ( F ) Representative image of AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre injection site. ( G ) Immunofluorescence image demonstrating ASIC2 (green) and AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre/mCherry (red) colocalization. Arrows indicate colocalization in AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-mCherry, but not AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre group. ( H ) Whole-cell patch-clamp recording of acid-induced ASIC-like currents in AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre (mCherry positive) mPFC neurons. ( I ) Representative traces of acid-induced currents in AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre (red) and AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-mCherry (black) neurons. ( J ) Comparison of desensitization decay times of acid-induced currents in neurons from (I). Effective ASIC2 deletion in AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre neurons shows prolonged desensitization times. ** P = 0.0082. n = 15 to 17 cells from four mice per group. ( K ) Schematic of tube test procedures following AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre injection into Asic2 f/f mouse mPFC. ( L ) Summary of tube test rankings before and after AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre and AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-mCherry injections. ( M ) Average percentage of winning times in the tube test before and after AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre and AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-mCherry injections. *** P = 0.0007, n = 6 cages. All comparisons by two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test.

    Journal: Science Advances

    Article Title: Mice lacking acid-sensing ion channel 2 in the medial prefrontal cortex exhibit social dominance

    doi: 10.1126/sciadv.adn7573

    Figure Lengend Snippet: ( A ) Generation of ASIC2-cKO mice in excitatory neurons (ASIC2-Vglut1-cKO) by crossbreeding Asic2 f/f mice with Vglut1-ires2-Cre mice. ( B ) Immunofluorescence images showing the absence of ASIC2 expression (green) in mPFC excitatory neurons labeled with N -methyl d -aspartate receptor subtype 2B (NR2B) (red). Inset highlights the lack of ASIC2 and NR2B colocalization. ( C ) One ASIC2-Vglut1-cKO and three WT mice cohoused for 2 weeks, followed by the tube test tournament to establish social rankings. Data from six cages per group summarized. ( D ) Comparison of time to stable rankings between ASIC2-Vglut1-cKO and WT subordinate mice. *** P = 0.0002, n = 6 cages. ( E ) Schematic of AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre injection into Asic2 f/f mouse mPFC neurons. ( F ) Representative image of AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre injection site. ( G ) Immunofluorescence image demonstrating ASIC2 (green) and AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre/mCherry (red) colocalization. Arrows indicate colocalization in AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-mCherry, but not AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre group. ( H ) Whole-cell patch-clamp recording of acid-induced ASIC-like currents in AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre (mCherry positive) mPFC neurons. ( I ) Representative traces of acid-induced currents in AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre (red) and AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-mCherry (black) neurons. ( J ) Comparison of desensitization decay times of acid-induced currents in neurons from (I). Effective ASIC2 deletion in AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre neurons shows prolonged desensitization times. ** P = 0.0082. n = 15 to 17 cells from four mice per group. ( K ) Schematic of tube test procedures following AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre injection into Asic2 f/f mouse mPFC. ( L ) Summary of tube test rankings before and after AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre and AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-mCherry injections. ( M ) Average percentage of winning times in the tube test before and after AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-Cre and AAV 2 -CaMKIIα-mCherry injections. *** P = 0.0007, n = 6 cages. All comparisons by two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test.

    Article Snippet: Primary antibodies used in this study are anti-ASIC1a antibody (Alomone Labs, no. ASC-014), anti-ASIC2 antibody (Alomone Labs, no. ASC-012), GluA1 polyclonal antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, no. PA5-99527), NMDAR2B polyclonal antibody (Innovative Research, no. 71-8600), PKA alpha antibody (Thermo Fisher Scientific, no. MA5-37857), and β-actin antibody (Cell Signaling Technology, no. 4967).

    Techniques: Immunofluorescence, Expressing, Labeling, Comparison, Injection, Patch Clamp, Two Tailed Test