Skip to main content
. 2009 May 27;1(4):302–312. doi: 10.1007/s11689-009-9017-8

Table 1.

Control measures in Nrg1, Erbb3, and Erbb4 mouse lines. Data shown are means ± SEM for body weight, percent time in and percent entries into the open arms of an elevated plus maze, total arm entries on the maze, latency to fall from a rotarod (trial 5), latency to find buried food and percent of group finding the food in a test for olfactory ability

N Body weight (g) %Open arm Total entries Rotarod latency (s) Olfactory test
Time Entries Entries Trial 1 Trial 5 latency (s) % group
Nrg1
Cohort 1
Nrg1+/+ 10 27 ± 1 4 ± 1% 11 ± 2% 16 ± 1 141 ± 25 260 ± 21 396 ± 120 70%
Nrg1+/− 10 27 ± 1 6 ± 2% 15 ± 3% 19 ± 2 103 ± 30 230 ± 28 205 ± 89 90%
Cohort 2
Nrg1+/+ 16 35 ± 1 4 ± 1% 9 ± 2% 12 ± 1 236 ± 17 300 ± 0 316 ± 90 75%
Nrg1+/− 15 33 ± 1 4 ± 1% 11 ± 3% 12 ± 2 207 ± 22 295 ± 3 75 ± 12 * 100%
Erbb3 WT 10 33 ± 2 2 ± 1% 11 ± 6% 5 ± 2 77 ± 11 169 ± 17 144 ± 85 90%
Erbb3 cKO 12 25 ± 0* 0.5 ± 0% 4 ± 2% 6 ± 1 132 ± 14* 187 ± 21 158 ± 32 100%
Erbb4 WT 11a 34 ± 4c 22 ± 4% 25 ± 4% 25 ± 3 110 ± 30 240 ± 32 172 ± 77 90%
Erbb4 cKO 14b 43 ± 1*c 30 ± 3% 29 ± 2% 31 ± 2 61 ± 13 234 ± 24 474 ± 104* 57%

WT wild-type, cKO conditional knockout

a3 males and 8 females

b7 males and 7 females. All other subject numbers are for male mice

cBody weights are given for male mice

*p < 0.05, comparison to wild-type group from same mouse line