Table 8.

Watermaze: probe trial day 8 path analysis

Less-excit (α6Cacna1a)WT, n = 20KO, n = 9MW/t test
Mice who reached P position77%100%
Before reaching P position
    Time to platform (s)19.8 ± 4.810.9 ± 3.00.28
    Distance traveled (m)2.7 ± 0.71.3 ± 0.30.26
    Deviation from optimal path1469.9 ± 468.8572.8 ± 218.10.30
    Time in zone direct (%)48.3 ± 5.357.3 ± 9.20.38
    Time in zone circling (%)20.6 ± 3.220.4 ± 3.70.98
    Thigmotaxis (%)15.5 ± 4.63.8 ± 2.10.13
AFTER reaching P position
    Time in zone target (%)44.1 ± 3.445.0 ± 3.70.87
    Time in zone opposite (%)12.4 ± 2.010.4 ± 1.90.54
No-inhib (L7-γ2)WT, n = 12KO, n = 12MW/t test
Mice who reached P position83%83%
Before reaching P position
    Time to platform (s)28.3 ± 6.122.1 ± 6.10.56
    Distance traveled (m)3.9 ± 0.82.5 ± 0.70.23
    Deviation from optimal path2527.8 ± 635.81926.3 ± 676.20.53
    Time in zone direct (%)30.2 ± 4.441.1 ± 7.00.20
    Time in zone circling (%)24.0 ± 4.617.0 ± 3.50.24
    Thigmotaxis (%)28.7 ± 7.929.5 ± 7.30.93
After reaching P position
    Time in zone target (%)45.5 ± 6.946.5 ± 6.20.82
    Time in zone opposite (%)10.2 ± 3.510.0 ± 2.70.82
No-LTP (L7-PP2B)WT, n = 10KO, n = 10MW/t test
Mice who reached P position90%100%
Before reaching P position
    Time to platform (s)13.1 ± 5.417.7 ± 4.80.26
    Distance traveled (m)2.0 ± 0.81.9 ± 0.60.71
    Deviation from optimal path1115.2 ± 579.81322.4 ± 514.60.88
    Time in zone Direct (%)42.8 ± 8.860.9 ± 10.10.14
    Time in zone Circling (%)30.3 ± 4.616.7 ± 5.90.04
    Thigmotaxis (%)11.9 ± 5.010.5 ± 5.50.42
After reaching P position
    Time in zone target (%)40.1 ± 4.143.5 ± 6.50.66
    Time in zone opposite (%)14.4 ± 2.66.4 ± 2.00.03
No-LTD (L7-PKCi)WT, n = 22TG, n = 22MW/t test
Mice who reached P position91%91%
Before reaching P position
    Time to platform (s)17.4 ± 3.416.9 ± 3.40.87
    Distance traveled (m)2.1 ± 0.42.4 ± 0.50.80
    Deviation from optimal path1351.1 ± 332.51525.8 ± 413.00.89
    Time in zone direct (%)40.9 ± 6.139.0 ± 6.30.74
    Time in zone circling (%)23.1 ± 3.921.3 ± 3.80.61
    Thigmotaxis (%)22.2 ± 6.128.6 ± 5.80.30
After reaching P position
    Time in zone target (%)37.3 ± 3.742.4 ± 3.80.29
    Time in zone opposite (%)13.7 ± 2.312.3 ± 1.90.65
  • For each mouse line the first row of the table indicates the percentage of individuals who reached the platform (P) position before the end of the 60 s probe trial. For those mice, in the before epoch mean values ± SEM of the time needed to reach the platform position, total distance traveled to reach the platform position from the start position, deviation from the optimal path (Fig. 7A shows graphical representation) and percentage of time spent in the three zones (direct, circling, and thigmotaxis; Fig. 7B) are reported for the four mouse lines. Moreover, the percentage of time spent during the after epoch in the target or opposite zone (Fig. 7C) is also reported as mean values ± SEM for all groups. Statistical differences between genotypes were calculated with a Student's t test for normally-distributed data (regular font) or with a Mann–Whitney test for non-normally distributed data (MW; italic font).