Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Jun 9.
Published in final edited form as: Pharmacol Biochem Behav. 2012 Oct 24;103(3):582–588. doi: 10.1016/j.pbb.2012.10.010

Figure 2. Dynamic measurements of gait detected by the DigiGait apparatus.

Figure 2

A) Swing duration (ms), 129 mice exhibited a significant increase in their fore paw swing time (A.1). B) An increase in propulsion time was detected in the hind paws of 129 mice (B.2). C) Stance duration (ms), no effect of EtOH dose. D) Stride duration time (ms) increased in the fore (D.1) and hind paws (D.2) of 129 mice. No significant difference was detected in B6 mice. E) Stride length (cm) increased in the fore (E.1) and hind paws (E.2) of 129 mice. B6 mice did not exhibit a detectable increase in stride length. F) Stance width (cm) decreased in the fore paws of the 129 mice (F.1) and increased in the hind paws of B6 mcice (F.2). G) Stride frequency (Hz) significantly decreased in the fore and hind paws of the 129 mouse. H) Paw angle measurements (degree) saw a significant overall decrease in 129 mice fore paws. A significant decrease in paw angle was detected in the hind paws of 129 mice. A significant increase in paw angle was identified in the hind paws of the B6 mice (H.2). White bars = 129X1/SvJ (129), Black bars = C57BL/6J (B6) mice. *= P<0.05, **=P<0.01 ***=P<0.001. Error bars represent ± SD.