Skip to main content
. 2022 Jun 8;13:927296. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2022.927296

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

Performance in the open field and object recognition of Foxg1 HET and wild-type mice. (A) Activity levels in the open field. Foxg1 HET mice showed higher activity levels than wild-type mice. Effect of genotype: ***p < 0.001. The mice showed spatial habituation, with activity in the open field decreasing over the 3 days [F (1.378, 44.10) = 11.89; p = 0.0004]. (B) Anxiety levels in the open field. Foxg1 HET mice spent less time in the more anxiety-provoking center of the open field than wild-type mice. Effect of genotype: *p < 0.05. Females spent more time in the center of the open field than males (p < 0.05). (C) There was no genotype difference in the time the mice spent exploring both object in the object recognition test. There was an effect of sex with the female mice exploring the objects more than the male mice that was mostly driven by Foxg1 HET female mice (p < 0.05). (D) The discrimination index was greater in wild-type mice than Foxg1 HET mice. Effect of genotype: *p = 0.0188.