(A) Schematic representation of a mouse on a rotarod and the diagram of the rotarod testing protocol for speeds between 4 and 4 rpm over 2 min (speed 2). (B) Performance on the second accelerating rotarod task during nine sessions over 3 consecutive days. Latency to fall was quantified at rotation speeds from 4 to 40 rpm over 2 min. (C) Performance of DAT::NrxnsWT and KO littermate mice on the rotarod was evaluated comparing the last and first sessions for each mouse. No significant improvement in performance was detected, irrespective of genotype. (D) Quantification of the final speed over all sessions shows no difference between the DAT::NrxnsWT and KO littermate mice. (E) Summary graph of the time to turn in the pole test shows no genotype effect (WT = 7.10 ± 1.50 s and KO = 4.57 ± 0.75 s). (F) Summary graph showing that the time required to climb down the pole was significantly higher for the DAT::NrxnsKO mice; (unpaired t-test, p=0.034) (WT = 5.80 ± 0.53 s and KO = 8.14 ± 0.93 s). (G) Schematic representation of the sucrose preference testing protocol. (H) Quantification of sucrose preference in comparison to water consumption represented as a percentage. Initial 2 days: DAT::NrxnsKO CD1: 51.47±1.63% vs 48.52 ± 1.63% and CD2: 54.01 ± 3.17%, vs 45.99 ± 3.17%; DAT::NrxnsWT CD1: 50.58±1.47% vs 49.41 ± 1.47% and CD2: 54.73 ± 4.27%, vs 45.26 ± 4.27%. Results are presented as percentage of choice water/water. Following 3 test days: DAT::NrxnsKO TD1: 81.24±2.44% vs 18.75 ± 2.44%; TD2: 74.65 ± 1.39%, vs 25.34 ± 1.39% and TD3: 78.74 ± 1.37%, vs 21.25 ± 1.37%; DAT::NrxnsWT TD1: 80.52±1.74% vs 19.47 ± 1.74%; TD2: 76.21 ± 1.75%, vs 23.78 ± 1.75% and TD3: 78.58 ± 2.00%, vs 21.41 ± 2.00%. Results are presented as percentage of choice sucrose/water. For rotarod and locomotor activity experiments, 7–14 animals per group were used. For sucrose experiment, 7–8 mice per group were used. For the pole test experiment, 7–10 animals per group were used. For all analyses, the plots represent the mean ± SEM. Statistical analyses were carried out by two-way ANOVAs followed by Tukey’s multiple comparison tests or Student’s t-test (*p<0.05; ****p<0.0001).