Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Figure 1.
CGRP and OVAR on EPM behaviors. A, The EPM and its components are shown on the left, an experimental timeline is provided on the right, and an equation for calculating the anxiety index is provided underneath. B, C, In 33 mice (17M/16F), two-way RM ANOVAs with Tukey’s post hoc analyses were used to evaluate B, anxiety indices, and C, center bouts due to either i.p. vehicle or i.p. CGRP as well as these i.p. injections to a brief (30 s) OVAR. Symbols are depicted: female (F), orange circle; male (M), blue square. B, Only OVAR after CGRP injection significantly increased anxiety indices in all mice. C, OVAR-induced anxiety strongly affected the number of center bouts detected in both females and males during both vehicle and CGRP testing. P-values and asterisks are listed: *p ≤ 0.05, **p ≤ 0.01, ***p ≤ 0.001, ****p ≤ 0.0001.
- Figure 2.
CGRP and OVAR on rotarod configured with two different dowels. A, Rotarod configured with a mouse or rat dowel is shown, and an experimental timeline highlighting training and experiment days is provided. Twenty mice (10M/10F) were tested with the mouse dowel, and 39 mice (20M/19F) were tested with the rat dowel. Two-way RM ANOVAs with Tukey’s multiple-comparisons test was used to evaluate maximum LTF. B–D, A disrupted pre-VC rotarod ability due to CGRP is observed in males (Fig. 2C). Again, after OVAR, there was a significant difference in males between i.p. vehicle and i.p. CGRP. E–G, Contrary to mouse dowel studies, rat dowel studies indicated an effect of OVAR but not systemic CGRP. OVAR reduced rotarod ability in female mice treated with i.p. vehicle Again, in female mice specifically, maximum LTFs dropped from vehicle to vehicle/post-OVAR, but this was not seen in males. P-values and asterisks are listed: *p ≤ 0.05, **p ≤ 0.01, ***p ≤ 0.001, ****p ≤ 0.0001.
Tables
- Table 1.
Anxiety index and bouts through the center were computed using three-way mixed-effects models, while rotarod data using the mouse dowel (r = 1.5 cm) and rat dowel (r = 3.5 cm) was computed using three-way ANOVAs
Behavioral outcome Factors F (DFn, DFd) p-value Anxiety index Vehicle versus CGRP F(1.00, 31.00) = 1.55 n.s. Pre- versus post-OVAR F(1.00, 31.00) = 58.50 p < 0.0001 Male versus female F(1.00, 14.00) = 0.80 n.s. Bouts through center Vehicle versus CGRP F(1.00, 31.00) = 0.47 n.s. Pre- versus post-OVAR F(1.00, 31.00) = 188.00 p < 0.0001 Male versus female F(1.00, 14.00) = 3.74 n.s. Rotarod—mouse dowel Vehicle versus CGRP F(1.00, 18.00) = 29.07 p < 0.0001 Pre- versus post-OVAR F(1.00, 18.00) = 0.07 n.s. Male versus female F(1.00, 18.00) = 0.17 n.s. Rotarod—rat dowel Vehicle versus CGRP F(1.00, 37.00) = 0.17 n.s. Pre- versus post-OVAR F(1.00, 37.00) = 21.03 p < 0.0001 Male versus female F(1.00, 37.00) = 1.88 n.s. For all multivariate analyses, we examined the following three factors: treatment (i.p. vehicle vs i.p. CGRP), VC (pre- vs post-OVAR), and biological sex (male vs female). F-values are listed with respect to degrees of freedom (DFn, DFd) and p-values are listed accordingly.
In this issue
