Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2009 Jul 25.
Published in final edited form as: Behav Brain Res. 2007 Nov 4;188(1):168–177. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2007.10.031

Fig. 7.

Fig. 7

Alarm substance treatment significantly increased Erratic movement in zebrafish. (Panel A) The percent of time zebrafish performed Erratic movement during the observation session is shown. (Panel B) The number of times (frequency) erratic movement was performed during the observation session is shown. Mean + S.E.M. is shown. Sample sizes (n) represent the number of five-fish shoals tested and are as follows: control (zero alarm substance) with predator present = 10; control (zero alarm substance) with predator absent = 10; high concentration alarm substance with predator present = 10; high concentration alarm substance with predator absent = 10. Note the robust increase in duration as well as frequency of Erratic movement in response to the alarm substance treatment as compared to control. Also note that despite that the experimental zebrafish had full access to cues of all modalities about the predator, the presence or absence of the predator had no significant effect. For procedural details, see Section 2. For details of the results of the statistical analysis, see Section 3.