Summary of quantitative data from behavioral testing of 6-month-old Monodelphis with spinal cords that had been transected completely by cutting at P4 (n = 3) compared with unoperated controls of the same age (n = 3)
| Control (n = 3) | Cut (n = 3) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | SEM | Mean | SEM | |
| Runway | ||||
| Stride length (cm) | 15.6 | 0.2 | 12.0 | 1.3 |
| Base of support (cm) | 2.8 | 0.2 | 2.6 | 0.2 |
| Narrow beam | ||||
| Time (sec) | 3.0 | 0.5 | 8.7* | 1.7 |
| Total errors | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.9 | 0.5 |
| 1.5 cm grid | ||||
| Time (sec) | 1.7 | 0.3 | 3.1* | 0.2 |
| Total errors HL | 0.7 | 0.3 | 1.5** | 0.2 |
| Total errors FL | 0.7 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 0.3 |
| 3.5 cm grid | ||||
| Time (sec) | 1.8 | 0.2 | 4.0*** | 0.2 |
| Total errors HL | 0.6 | 0.3 | 1.6*,** | 0.2 |
| Total errors FL | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.1 |
| Swim + climb | ||||
| Time (sec) | 2.4 | 0.06 | 4.0 | 0.7 |
After training each animal performed each test 10 times (7 times for swimming), and the mean values were calculated (illustrated for some of the tests in Fig. 5). Here are presented the means and SEMs for all the control and for all the operated animals. None of the differences between control and operated in the runway footprint analysis was statistically significant; only stride length and base of support are shown. The operated opossums were significantly slower at climbing the beam and crossing both grids but did not make more errors than the controls. However, as with the animals with crush lesions (Table 3), there was a significant difference in error rate between forelimbs (FL) and hindlimbs (HL) of the operated animals when crossing the grids. *p < 0.05; ***p < 0.01 for differences between control and operated animals. **Significance level between the mean errors of the hind and forelimbs in the operated animals (p < 0.015).