Reporting Checklist for Nature Neuroscience

Transcription

1 Corponding Author: Manuscript Number: Manuscript Type: Gregory C. DeAngelis NNA49009A Article Reporting Checklist for Nature Neuroscience # Main Figu: 7 # lementary Figu: # lementary Tables: 0 # lementary Videos: 5 This checklist is used to ensure good reporting standards and to improve the reproducibility of published ults. For more information, please read Reporting Life Sciences Research. Please note that in the event of publication, it is mandatory that authors include all relevant methodological and statistical information in the manuscript. Statistics reporting, by figure example example Please specify the following information for each panel reporting quantitative data, and where each item is reported (section, e.g., & graph number). Each figure legend should ideally contain an exact sample size (n) for each experimental group/condition, where n is an exact number and not a range, a clear definition of how n is defined (for example x cells from x slices from x animals from x litters, collected over x days), a description of the statistical used, the ults of the s, any descriptive statistics and clearly defined error bars if applicable. For any experiments using custom statistics, please indicate the used and stats obtained for each experiment. Each figure legend should include a statement of how many times the experiment shown was replicated in the lab; the details of sample collection should be sufficiently clear so that the replicability of the experiment is obvious to the reader. For experiments reported in the text but not in the figu, please use the graph number instead of the figure number. Note: Mean and standard deviation are not appropriate on small samples, and plotting independent data points is usually more informative. When technical replicates are reported, error and measu reflect the experimental variability and not the variability of the biological process; it is misleading not to state this clearly. FIGURE NUMBER 1a ults, TEST USED WHICH TEST? oneway ANOVA unpaired t legend EXACT VALUE 9, 9, 10, 15 n DEFINED? mice from at least 3 litters/group 15 slices from 10 mice Methods DESCRIPTIVE STATS (AVERAGE, VARIANCE) REPORTED? error bars are mean / SEM error bars are mean / SEM legend P VALUE EXACT VALUE p = p = legend DEGREES OF FREEDOM & F/t/z/R/ETC VALUE VALUE F(3, 3) = 2.97 t(2) = 2.0 legend 1

2 FIGURE NUMBER 2d 3a 3b 3c 9 3ac 3ac 3d 12 TEST USED WHICH TEST? signed signed significant 3,4,5, legend 3bc 3d 12 EXACT VALUE equal to or greater than n DEFINED? trials without break of fixation trials without break of fixation trials without break of fixation trials without break of fixation no less than reps/ depth for each condition (hereafter "total population") Iteratively for each neuron in the total population four depths in total population DSDI values for three conditions in total population total population 3ac legend 12 DESCRIPTIVE STATS (AVERAGE, VARIANCE) REPORTED? error bas are mean / SEM error bas are mean / SEM error bas are mean / SEM error bas are mean / SEM median (0.53, ) median (0.53, ) Filled bars (significnatly different zero), open bars (not significant) medians are plotted as filled triangles 2d 3a 3b 3c Res 9 3ac 3bc Res Res Res 12 P VALUE EXACT VALUE ^ ^7 individual values not shown.7 10^.3 10^.9 10^ Result 3,4,5, bc 3d 12 DEGREES OF FREEDOM & F/t/z/R/ETC VALUE VALUE DSDI = DSDI = DSDI = DSDI = median = (RM) (DP) (MP) R = 0.9 R = 0.13, 0.25 R =

3 Twosample Kolmogorov Smirnov partial signed signed signed signed signed signed signed , 74 (sum to 103) significant RM DSDI / the t of neurons ,39, 33,39, significant and opposite depthsign between MP and BD conditions significant and the same depthsign between MP and BD conditions nonsignificant depthsign selectivity in either MP or BD condition DPsize condition DPsize condition DPbalanced condition DPbalanced condition MP DP condition 'matched', 'unclassfied', 'mismatched' neurons 'matched', 'unclassfied', 'mismatched' neurons 33 'matched' neurons 37 noise stimuli median DSDI (0.5, 0.52) median DSDI (0.5, 0.34, 0.17) / / / / / / MP: DP: ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ R = 0.3 R = 0.35 R = 0.2 R = 0.70 R = 0.02 R = 0.94 R = MPDP vs. DP MPDP vs. MP MP vs. DP MP vs. RM DP vs. RM noise stimuli ^4 27 R = 0.7 3

4 signed signed 4 (M1), 55(M2) 102 Repentative figu total population from each animal DP condition and size tuning 1. Are any repentative images shown (including Western blots and immunohistochemistry/staining) in the paper? If so, what figure(s)? 2. For each repentative image, is there a clear statement of how many times this experiment was successfully repeated and a discussion of any limitations in repeatability? If so, where is this reported (section, graph #)? Statistics and general methods 1. Is there a justification of the sample size? If so, how was it justified? Where (section, graph #)? Even if no sample size calculation was performed, authors should report why the sample size is adequate to measure their effect size. 2. Are statistical s justified as appropriate for every figure? Where (section, graph #)? a. If there is a section summarizing the statistical methods in the methods, is the statistical for each experiment clearly defined? b. Do the data meet the assumptions of the specific statistical you chose (e.g. normality for a metric )? Where is this described (section, graph #)? median (1.00) median (0.02, 0.03) No ^ R = 0.1, 0.25 R = 0.19 Based on previous literature using awake animals, we collected more than hundred neurons from two monkeys. Sample size calculations were not performed a priori, as stated at the end of the Methods section Standard nonmetric are used. Bootstrap for DSDI value was described in Methods. Other are widelyused nonmetric s (signed,, etc.) No metric was used. 4

5 c. Is there any estimate of variance within each group of data? Is the variance similar between groups that are being statistically compared? Where is this described (section, graph #)? In graph 12, variances of two groups are significantly different, so we used twosample Kolmogorov Smirnov. For all the other places, paired ( signed ) was used to compare between groups. d. Are s specified as one or twosided? all standard nonmetric s were twosided. e. Are there adjustments for multiple comparisons? No multiple comparison was used. 3. Are criteria for excluding data points reported? Was this criterion established prior to data collection? Where is this described (section, graph #)? 4. Define the method of randomization used to assign subjects (or samples) to the experimental groups and to collect and process data. If no randomization was used, state so. Where does this appear (section, graph #)? 5. Is a statement of the extent to which investigator knew the group allocation during the experiment and in assessing outcome included? If no blinding was done, state so. Where (section, graph #)?. For experiments in live vertebrates, is a statement of compliance with ethical guidelines/regulations included? Where (section, graph #)? 7. Is the species of the animals used reported? Where (section, graph #)?. Is the strain of the animals (including background strains of KO/ transgenic animals used) reported? Where (section, graph #)? 9. Is the sex of the animals/subjects used reported? Where (section, graph #)? 10. Is the age of the animals/subjects reported? Where (section, graph #)? We described in graph 9 that neurons not ponding to speed of motion less than 7deg/s were excluded. This criterion was set up prior to data collection. stimulus conditions (RM, MP, DP, DPsize, DPbalanced, MPDP) are randomly interleaved. It is described in Methods, a graph titled as Depth Tuning Measurement. Group of neurons (congruent/opposite, matched/mismatched) was determined at the end of data collection. no data were discarded by the grouping. Not included in text. Yes. Methods graph 2 has a statement that all protocols were approved by university committee. Yes. Methods graph 1 (macaque mulatta). no genetically manipulated animals were used. Yes. Methods graph 1 (male) Not reported. Both monkeys are age of yr.. For animals housed in a vivarium, is the light/dark cycle reported? Where (section, graph #)? Not reported. animals had light from am to pm. Otherwise the cage was in complete darkness. 5

6 12. For animals housed in a vivarium, is the housing group (i.e. number of animals per cage) reported? Where (section, graph #)? 13. For behavioral experiments, is the time of day reported (e.g. light or dark cycle)? Where (section, graph #)?. Is the previous history of the animals/subjects (e.g. prior drug administration, surgery, behavioral ing) reported? Where (section, graph #)? a. If multiple behavioral s were conducted in the same group of animals, is this reported? Where (section, graph #)? 15. If any animals/subjects were excluded from analysis, is this reported? Where (section, graph #)? Reagents a. How were the criteria for exclusion defined? Where is this described (section, graph #)? b. Specify reasons for any discrepancy between the number of animals at the beginning and end of the study. Where is this described (section, graph #)? 1. Have antibodies been validated for use in the system under study (assay and species)? a. Is antibody catalog number given? Where does this appear (section, graph #)? b. Where were the validation data reported (citation, supplementary information, Antibodypedia)? Where does this appear (section, graph #)? 2. If cell lines were used to reflect the properties of a particular tissue or disease state, is their source identified? Not reported. Each animal ided in their own cage. Often we paired animals if they get along each other. Not reported. experiments were conducted between 9am1pm or pm. Not reported. Animals did not have prior history of other uses. One animal was used for extracellular recording from area MSTd using a task that only requi fixation during stimulus pentation. No other behavior s were conducted in the animals. No animals were excluded from analysis. Where (section, graph #)?

7 a. Were they recently authenticated? Where is this information reported (section, graph #)? Data deposition Data deposition in a public repository is mandatory for: a. Protein, DNA and RNA sequences b. Macromolecular structu c. Crystallographic data for small molecules d. Microarray data Deposition is strongly recommended for many other datasets for which structured public repositories exist; more details on our data policy are available here. We encourage the provision of other source data in supplementary information or in unstructured repositories such as Figshare and Dryad. 1. Are accession codes for deposit dates provided? Where (section, graph #)? Computer code/software Any custom algorithm/software that is central to the methods must be supplied by the authors in a usable and readable form for readers at the time of publication. However, referees may ask for this information at any time during the review process. 1. Identify all custom software or scripts that were required to conduct the study and where in the procedu each was used. 2. Is computer source code/software provided with the paper or deposited in a public repository? Indicate in what form this is provided or how it can be obtained. Human subjects 1. Which IRB approved the protocol? Where is this stated (section, graph #)? 2. Is demographic information on all subjects provided? Where (section, graph #)? 3. Is the number of human subjects, their age and sex clearly defined? Where (section, graph #)? Matlab (MathWorks) was used for data analysis. TEMPO (Reflective Computing) was used for experimental control, customized C program was used for stimulus generation and MOOG motion platform control. It can be obtained by inquiry to authors. No human subjects participated in the current study. 4. Are the inclusion and exclusion criteria (if any) clearly specified? Where (section, graph #)? 7

8 5. How well were the groups matched? Where is this information described (section, graph #)?. Is a statement included confirming that informed consent was obtained from all subjects? Where (section, graph #)? 7. For publication of patient photos, is a statement included confirming that consent to publish was obtained? Where (section, graph #)? fmri studies For papers reporting functional imaging (fmri) ults please ensure that these minimal reporting guidelines are met and that all this information is clearly provided in the methods: 1. Were any subjects scanned but then rejected for the analysis after the data was collected? a. If yes, is the number rejected and reasons for rejection described? Where (section, graph #)? 2. Is the number of blocks, trials or experimental units per session and/ or subjects specified? Where (section, graph #)? 3. Is the length of each trial and interval between trials specified? 4. Is a blocked, eventrelated, or mixed design being used? If applicable, please specify the block length or how the eventrelated or mixed design was optimized. 5. Is the task design clearly described? Where (section, graph #)?. How was behavioral performance measured? 7. Is an ANOVA or factorial design being used?. For data acquisition, is a whole brain scan used? If not, state area of acquisition. a. How was this region determined?

9 9. Is the field strength (in Tesla) of the MRI system stated? a. Is the pulse sequence type (gradient/spin echo, EPI/spiral) stated? b. Are the fieldofview, matrix size, slice thickness, and TE/TR/ flip angle clearly stated? 10. Are the software and specific meters (model/functions, smoothing kernel size if applicable, etc.) used for data processing and preprocessing clearly stated?. Is the coordinate space for the anatomical/functional imaging data clearly defined as subject/native space or standardized stereotaxic space, e.g., original Talairach, MNI305, ICBM152, etc? Where (section, graph #)? 12. If there was data normalization/standardization to a specific space template, are the type of transformation (linear vs. nonlinear) used and image types being transformed clearly described? Where (section, graph #)? 13. How were anatomical locations determined, e.g., via an automated labeling algorithm (AAL), standardized coordinate database (Talairach daemon), probabilistic atlases, etc.?. Were any additional regsors (behavioral covariates, motion etc) used? 15. Is the contrast construction clearly defined?. Is a mixed/random effects or fixed inference used? a. If fixed effects inference used, is this justified? 17. Were repeated measu used (multiple measurements per subject)? a. If so, are the method to account for within subject and the assumptions made about variance clearly stated? 1. If the thhold used for inference and visualization in figu varies, is this clearly stated? 19. Are statistical inferences corrected for multiple comparisons? a. If not, is this labeled as uncorrected? 9

10 . Are the ults based on an ROI (region of intet) analysis? a. If so, is the rationale clearly described? b. How were the ROI s defined (functional vs anatomical localization)? 21. Is there correction for multiple comparisons within each voxel?. For clusterwise, is the clusterdefining thhold and the corrected level defined? Additional comments Additional Comments 10