Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Sep 15.
Published in final edited form as: Behav Brain Res. 2015 May 12;291:164–171. doi: 10.1016/j.bbr.2015.05.003

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4

Behavior of WT and Fmr1 KO mice on the passive avoidance protocol with two training shocks: (A) Effects of genotype on short-term memory in WT (60) and Fmr1 KO (66) mice, (B) Effects of genotype and propofol (200 mg/kg) on long-term memory in vehicle-injected WT (10) and Fmr1 KO (10) mice and propofol-injected WT (11) and Fmr1 KO (11) mice, (C) Effects of inhibition of FAAH (URB-597 (0.3 mg/kg)) or MAGL (JZL-184 (16 mg/kg)) on long-term memory in vehicle-injected WT (11) and Fmr1 KO (9) mice, URB-597-injected WT (18) and Fmr1 KO (18) mice, and JZL-184-injected WT (10) and Fmr1 KO (9) mice. Bars represent the means ± SEM for the number of animals indicated above in parentheses. Data on short-term memory (A) were analyzed by means of RM ANOVA with genotype as the between subjects factor and training trial as the within subjects factor. The interaction genotype × training trial (F(1,124) = 3.161; P = .078) approached statistical significance, and the main effects of training trial (F(1,124) = 50.317; P < .001) and genotype (F(1,124) = 5.374; P = .022) achieved statistical significance. Data on the effects of propofol on behavior in passive avoidance test after two-shock training (B) were analyzed by means of two-way ANOVA with genotype and propofol treatment as between subjects factors. The genotype × treatment interaction (F(1,38) = 6.527; P = .015) and the main effect of genotype (F(1,38) = 7.055; P = .012) were both statistically significant, but the main effect of propofol was not (F(1,38) = 0.280; P = .600). Data on the effects of URB-597 and JZL-134 on behavior in passive avoidance test after two-shock training (C) were analyzed by means of two-way ANOVA with genotype and treatment as between subjects factors. The genotype × treatment interaction (F(2,70) = 4.329; P = .017) and the main effect of genotype (F(1,70) = 17.300; P < .000) were both statistically significant, but the main effect of treatment was not (F(2,70) = 2.556; P = .085). In cases in which interactions were statistically significant we probed pairwise comparisons with t-tests corrected for multiple comparisons. Statistically significant differences between genotypes with the same treatment are indicated as follows: *, P ≤ .01; **, P ≤ .001.