Figure - PMC

Skip to main content

An official website of the United States government

Here's how you know

Here's how you know

Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

View full-text article in PMC

. 2022 Apr 1;13(2):583–613. doi: 10.14336/AD.2021.0829

Search in PMC
Search in PubMed
View in NLM Catalog
Add to search

Copyright: © 2022 Attaluri et al.

this is an open access article distributed under the terms of the creative commons attribution license, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium provided that the original work is properly attributed.

PMC Copyright notice

Figure 2. — Eight weeks of nCUR treatment, commencing 2 months after exposure to GWI-related chemicals and stress, improved cognitive and mood function. The bar charts in the top two rows show the results of an object location test (OLT). Cartoon (A) shows the various phases involved in OLT whereas, the bar charts in (B-E) show the performance of animals belonging to naïve and GWI rats receiving vehicle (GWI-VEH) or different doses of nCUR (GWI-nCUR10, GWI-nCUR20). The animals in the naïve group (B) preferred the object in a novel place (OINP) over the object in a familiar place (OIFP), implying their ability to discern minor changes in the environment. Animals in the GWI-VEH group (C) were impaired, as they preferred the OIFP over the OINP, whereas animals in nCUR10 (D) and nCUR20 (E) groups behaved akin to the naive control group, implying an improved cognitive function. The bar charts (F-G) compare the total object exploration times (TOETs) in trial-2 (T2) and T3. The bar charts in rows 3-4 show the results of a novel object recognition test (NORT). Cartoon H shows the various phases involved in NORT, whereas the bar charts in (I-L) show the performance of animals belonging to different groups. The animals in the naïve group (I) preferred the novel object (NO) over the familiar object (FO), suggesting their proficiency for object recognition memory. Animals in the GWI-VEH group (J) were impaired, as they did not prefer NO, whereas animals in nCUR10 (K) and nCUR20 (L) groups behaved similarly to the naive control group, implying an improved recognition memory function. The bar charts (M-N) compare the TOETs in T2 and T3. The bar charts in the last row (O-S) show the results of a sucrose preference test. Animals in the naïve group (O) preferred sucrose-containing water over the standard water. Animals in the GWI-VEH group (P) exhibited anhedonia as they did not prefer the sucrose-containing water, whereas animals in GWI-nCUR10 (R) and nCUR20 (S) groups preferred to drink the sucrose-containing water, implying no anhedonia. The bar chart in S compares the total fluid consumption across groups. *, p<0.05, **, p<0.01, ***, p<0.001, and ****, p<0.0001; NS, not significant.