Statistical analysis of patch-clamp data from figures in the main text
| Figure | Cell type | Experiment | Stimulus | I[Na+] | n | P-value |
| (pA/pF) Mean/range | ||||||
| 1 E | VSMC | shControl | AA | 0.374/0.084 | 4 | |
| VSMC | shOrai1 | AA | 0.034/0.027 | 4 | shOrai1 vs. shCont.; P = 2.53 E-06 | |
| 1 I | HEK293 | siControl | AA | 0.409/0.039 | 4 | |
| HEK293 | siOrai1 | AA | 0.106/0.044 | 5 | siOrai vs. siCont.; P = 2.77 E-08 | |
| 2 E | VSMC | Control | AA | 0.389/0.117 | 6 | |
| VSMC | siOrai2 | AA | 0.375/0.060 | 4 | siOrai2 vs. Cont.; P = 0.565 | |
| VSMC | shOrai3 | AA | 0.051/0.069 | 5 | shOrai3 vs. Cont.; P = 4.90 E-07 | |
| 2 I | HEK293 | Control | AA | 0.397/0.069 | 4 | |
| HEK293 | siOrai2 | AA | 0.380/0.096 | 5 | siOrai2 vs. Cont.; P = 0.394 | |
| HEK293 | siOrai3 | AA | 0.161/0.097 | 5 | siOrai3 vs. Cont.; P = 8.55 E-07 | |
| 3 F | VSMC | WT | ETYA | 0.195/0.065 | 6 | |
| VSMC | WT | AA | 0.379/0.063 | 4 | AA vs. ETYA; P = 3.59 E-06 | |
| VSMC | WT | NDGA + AA | 0.185/0.087 | 5 | ||
| VSMC | WT | NDGA + LTC4 | 0.384/0.066 | 5 | NDGA+LTC4 vs. NDGA + AA; P = 7.45 E-06 | |
| 3 L | HEK293 | WT | ETYA | 0.191/0.053 | 4 | |
| HEK293 | WT | AA | 0.391/0.076 | 5 | AA vs. ETYA; P = 1.40 E-05 | |
| HEK293 | WT | NDGA + AA | 0.201/0.107 | 5 | ||
| HEK293 | WT | NDGA + LTC4 | 0.384/0.048 | 5 | NDGA + LTC4 vs. NDGA + AA; P = 1.71 E-05 | |
| 4 F | VSMC | WT pipette | NMLTC4 | 0.366/0.082 | 4 | |
| VSMC | WT bath | NMLTC4 | 0.038/0.052 | 5 | NMLTC4 in Bath vs. in pipette; P = 7.61 E-07 | |
| 5 F | VSMC | siControl | AA | 0.403/0.056 | 5 | |
| VSMC | siSTIM1 | AA | 0.039/0.102 | 5 | siSTIM1 vs. siCont.; P = 7.57 E-08 | |
| VSMC | +WT-STIM1 | AA | 0.301/0.087 | 6 | +WT-STIM1 vs. siSTIM1; P = 3.27 E-05 | |
| VSMC | +eYFP-STIM1 | AA | 0.060/0.086 | 4 | +eYFP-STIM1 vs. siSTIM1; P = 0.436 | |
| HEK293 | siControl | AA | 0.417/0.147 | 6 | ||
| HEK293 | siSTIM1 | AA | 0.037/0.056 | 5 | siSTIM1 vs. siCont.; P = 1.51 E-07 | |
| HEK293 | +WT-STIM1 | AA | 0.311/0.169 | 5 | +WT-STIM1 vs. siSTIM1; P = 1.28 E-05 | |
| HEK293 | +eYFP-STIM1 | AA | 0.068/0.080 | 5 | +eYFP-STIM1 vs. siSTIM1; P = 0.158 | |
| 6 F | HEK293 | siControl | LTC4 | 0.416/0.135 | 6 | |
| HEK293 | siSTIM1 | LTC4 | 0.028/0.036 | 4 | siSTIM1 vs. siCont.; P = 3.32 E-07 | |
| HEK293 | +WT-STIM1 | LTC4 | 0.323/0.169 | 5 | +WT-STIM1 vs. siSTIM1; P = 8.68 E-05 | |
| HEK293 | +eYFP-STIM1 | LTC4 | 0.037/0.043 | 5 | +eYFP-STIM1 vs. siSTIM1; P = 0.442 | |
| 7 F | VSMC | siControl | AA | 0.385/0.035 | 5 | |
| VSMC | siSTIM1 | AA | 0.038/0.039 | 5 | siSTIM1 vs. siCont.; P = 3.40 E-10 | |
| VSMC | +WT-STIM1 | AA | 0.315/0.149 | 6 | +WT-STIM1 vs. siSTIM1; P = 5.84 E-07 | |
| VSMC | +eYFP-STIM1 | AA | 0.331/0.126 | 5 | +eYFP-STIM1 vs. siSTIM1; P = 4.74 E-06 |
| Figure | Cell type | Experiment | Stimulus | I[Na+] | n | P-value |
| (pA/pF) Mean/range | ||||||
| 1 E | VSMC | shControl | AA | 0.374/0.084 | 4 | |
| VSMC | shOrai1 | AA | 0.034/0.027 | 4 | shOrai1 vs. shCont.; P = 2.53 E-06 | |
| 1 I | HEK293 | siControl | AA | 0.409/0.039 | 4 | |
| HEK293 | siOrai1 | AA | 0.106/0.044 | 5 | siOrai vs. siCont.; P = 2.77 E-08 | |
| 2 E | VSMC | Control | AA | 0.389/0.117 | 6 | |
| VSMC | siOrai2 | AA | 0.375/0.060 | 4 | siOrai2 vs. Cont.; P = 0.565 | |
| VSMC | shOrai3 | AA | 0.051/0.069 | 5 | shOrai3 vs. Cont.; P = 4.90 E-07 | |
| 2 I | HEK293 | Control | AA | 0.397/0.069 | 4 | |
| HEK293 | siOrai2 | AA | 0.380/0.096 | 5 | siOrai2 vs. Cont.; P = 0.394 | |
| HEK293 | siOrai3 | AA | 0.161/0.097 | 5 | siOrai3 vs. Cont.; P = 8.55 E-07 | |
| 3 F | VSMC | WT | ETYA | 0.195/0.065 | 6 | |
| VSMC | WT | AA | 0.379/0.063 | 4 | AA vs. ETYA; P = 3.59 E-06 | |
| VSMC | WT | NDGA + AA | 0.185/0.087 | 5 | ||
| VSMC | WT | NDGA + LTC4 | 0.384/0.066 | 5 | NDGA+LTC4 vs. NDGA + AA; P = 7.45 E-06 | |
| 3 L | HEK293 | WT | ETYA | 0.191/0.053 | 4 | |
| HEK293 | WT | AA | 0.391/0.076 | 5 | AA vs. ETYA; P = 1.40 E-05 | |
| HEK293 | WT | NDGA + AA | 0.201/0.107 | 5 | ||
| HEK293 | WT | NDGA + LTC4 | 0.384/0.048 | 5 | NDGA + LTC4 vs. NDGA + AA; P = 1.71 E-05 | |
| 4 F | VSMC | WT pipette | NMLTC4 | 0.366/0.082 | 4 | |
| VSMC | WT bath | NMLTC4 | 0.038/0.052 | 5 | NMLTC4 in Bath vs. in pipette; P = 7.61 E-07 | |
| 5 F | VSMC | siControl | AA | 0.403/0.056 | 5 | |
| VSMC | siSTIM1 | AA | 0.039/0.102 | 5 | siSTIM1 vs. siCont.; P = 7.57 E-08 | |
| VSMC | +WT-STIM1 | AA | 0.301/0.087 | 6 | +WT-STIM1 vs. siSTIM1; P = 3.27 E-05 | |
| VSMC | +eYFP-STIM1 | AA | 0.060/0.086 | 4 | +eYFP-STIM1 vs. siSTIM1; P = 0.436 | |
| HEK293 | siControl | AA | 0.417/0.147 | 6 | ||
| HEK293 | siSTIM1 | AA | 0.037/0.056 | 5 | siSTIM1 vs. siCont.; P = 1.51 E-07 | |
| HEK293 | +WT-STIM1 | AA | 0.311/0.169 | 5 | +WT-STIM1 vs. siSTIM1; P = 1.28 E-05 | |
| HEK293 | +eYFP-STIM1 | AA | 0.068/0.080 | 5 | +eYFP-STIM1 vs. siSTIM1; P = 0.158 | |
| 6 F | HEK293 | siControl | LTC4 | 0.416/0.135 | 6 | |
| HEK293 | siSTIM1 | LTC4 | 0.028/0.036 | 4 | siSTIM1 vs. siCont.; P = 3.32 E-07 | |
| HEK293 | +WT-STIM1 | LTC4 | 0.323/0.169 | 5 | +WT-STIM1 vs. siSTIM1; P = 8.68 E-05 | |
| HEK293 | +eYFP-STIM1 | LTC4 | 0.037/0.043 | 5 | +eYFP-STIM1 vs. siSTIM1; P = 0.442 | |
| 7 F | VSMC | siControl | AA | 0.385/0.035 | 5 | |
| VSMC | siSTIM1 | AA | 0.038/0.039 | 5 | siSTIM1 vs. siCont.; P = 3.40 E-10 | |
| VSMC | +WT-STIM1 | AA | 0.315/0.149 | 6 | +WT-STIM1 vs. siSTIM1; P = 5.84 E-07 | |
| VSMC | +eYFP-STIM1 | AA | 0.331/0.126 | 5 | +eYFP-STIM1 vs. siSTIM1; P = 4.74 E-06 |
Statistical analysis on patch-clamp data performed in this study organized figure by figure and showing mean/range of Na+ currents with the corresponding n number and p-values. WT, wild type; AA, arachidonic acid; LTC4, leukotriene C4; NMLTC4, N-methyl leukotrieneC4; ETYA, eicosatetraynoic acid; NGDA, nordihydroguaiaretic acid.