Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(5)
And male culture-derived mice explored a maze more boldly than did the other mice, the team reports online this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
When exposed to an open-field, juvenile (P10) enriched mice explored a significantly greater area of the environment compared to non-enriched counterparts.
In the novel object recognition, both male and female MRCaMKCre mice explored a novel object more than control mice did.
WT and cKO mice explored a similar distance and expended a similar amount time (data not shown) to find the hidden platform during the 8 days of learning sessions.
To understand whether this peculiar feature of Tau neurons requires spatial experience, we also recorded CA1 neurons while mice explored a novel open box for one to two sessions and then ran back and forth (two trajectories) on a novel track for one to two sessions in a novel room.
Similar(55)
In comparison to the saline-treated pups, the fluoxetine-treated mice explored less while in a maze.
We found that during the training phase, the mice explored both objects equally (A: 50.41 ± 2.15%, B: 49.59 ± 2.15%; t-test, P = 0.7916; n = 10), whereas during the test-phase, the mice explored the novel object to a significantly larger extent in comparison with the familiar object (A: 27.42 ± 2.52%, C: 72.58 ± 2.52%) in the test phase (t-test, P < 0.0001; n = 10) (Fig. 2 c ).
FTG mice were less active than FNTG mice (13.6 pixels/mouse frame), but FTG mice explored the light compartment for a longer time period.
WT control and Tg P301S mice explored the sample objects to a similar extent, indicating that there was no major difference in motivation between groups at different ages (Fig. S1).
During novel configuration, the mice explored to newly located objects to a significantly greater degree (194.69 ± 18.10%; t-test, P < 0.0001).
Behaviorally, the data showed that the mice explored the objects in the familiar location to a significantly reduced extent during reexposure (63.81 ± 6.97%; t-test, P < 0.0001; n = 16) when compared with novelty exploration (Fig. 5 c ).
More suggestions(4)
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com