Skip to main content
. 2019 Feb 18;29(4):567–577.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2019.01.017

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Locomotor Kinematics and Open-Field Behavior of Freely Moving FoxP Mutant Flies

(A) Analysis of FoxP5-SZ-3955 (orange) and FoxPf03746 (green) mutant flies compared to w1118 control (blue).

(B) Temporal activity over 1-h recording with shaded area representing SEM—which was used to indicate the precision of the estimate of the mean; dashed vertical line represents mechanical stimuli applied after 30 min of recording; right panel, mean activity over 60 min.

(C) Temporal distribution of IBIs fitted to a Weibull distribution and the dotted line showing the survival curve fitted response; right panel, shape factor κ.

(D) Turning behavior with approach angle. The fly cartoon represents bimodal distribution that is impaired in FoxP mutants.

(E) Mean radial distance during turns (top left), mean exploration behavior covering arena space (top middle), place preference shown as heatmap (right), percentage spent in outer edge region (bottom left), and mean number of crossings between inner region and outer edge region (bottom middle). All data are mean ± SEM; p < 0.5; ∗∗p < 0.01; ∗∗∗p < 0.001.

See also Figure S2 and Data S1.