Skip to main content
. 2017 Dec 18;12(12):e0189413. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0189413

Fig 2. EHT prevents Aβ-induced impairment of spatial learning and memory in a 2-day radial arm water maze task.

Fig 2

(A) Average number of errors committed (± SEM) during each 3-trial training block of a 2-day radial arm water maze task for the indicated treatment groups. 2-way RM-ANOVA for day 2 (blocks 6–10) with block and group as factors: F (5,69) = 4.424, P = 0.0015 for group; F (4,276) = 25.95, P<0.0001 for block,; F (20,276) = 0.5657, P = 0.9338 for interaction. Bonferroni post-hoc comparisons of the control + vehicle group to all other treatment groups show that only the control + Aβ group is significantly different than control + vehicle group. (N = 12 control + vehicle, 13 control + Aβ, 12 0.01% EHT + vehicle, 12 0.01% + Aβ, 13 0.1% + vehicle, 13 0.1% EHT + Aβ.) (B) Plot of the average escape latency (± SEM) for the indicated treatment groups during training on a visible platform Morris water maze task reveals no significant differences between groups (2-way RM-ANOVA with trial block and treatment group as factors: F(5,69) = 0.9766, P = 0.4384 for group, F(3,207) = 72.48, P<0.0001 for block, and F(15,207) = 0.8627, P = 0.6068 for interaction). (N = 12 control + vehicle, 13 control + Aβ, 12 0.01% EHT + vehicle, 12 0.01% + Aβ, 13 0.1% + vehicle, 13 0.1% EHT + Aβ). (C) Plot of the average swim speed (± SEM) for the indicated treatment groups during training on the visible platform Morris water maze task described in B reveals no significant differences between groups (2-way RM-ANOVA with trial block and treatment group as factors: F(5,69) = 1.232, P = 0.3035 for group, F(3,207) = 28.3, P<0.0001 for block, and F(15,207) = 0.9227, P = 0.5398 for interaction).