Skip to main content
. 2017 Jul;24(7):267–277. doi: 10.1101/lm.045427.117

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Simple discrimination (SD) Learning, Compound Discrimination (CD) Learning 1, and Conflict Learning 1 in ASST Phase 1. Numbers of ETC (A) and TTC (B) were recorded. BC1 KO animals were significantly impaired in Simple Discrimination Learning (left panels), in comparison with WT animals (HR = 0.63, 95% CI 0.41–0.96, P = 0.03). Line 13 animals performed better than line B animals (HR = 1.96, 95% CI 1.21–3.18, P = 0.007, not shown). In Compound Discrimination Learning (center panels), KO and WT animals performed comparably (HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.47–1.06, P = 0.09). Again, however, line 13 animals outperformed line B animals (HR = 1.52, 95% CI 1.02–2.26, P = 0.04, not shown). In the Conflict Learning session (right panels), numbers of ETC and TTC were significantly higher for KO than for WT mice (HR = 0.40, 95% CI 0.22–0.73, P = 0.003). Line 13 mice performed better than line B mice (HR = 1.91, 95% CI 1.03–3.53, P = 0.04; not shown). Thus, in Simple Discrimination Learning, in Compound Discrimination Learning, and in Conflict Learning, KO-13 animals performed significantly better than KO-B animals and WT-13 animals performed significantly better than WT-B animals. n = 8 for each group.