63 research outputs found

    Effects of sleep deprivation on sleep recovery and EEG delta power changes during NREM sleep.

    No full text
    <p>(A) Time-course changes in NREM sleep (NREMS) and REM sleep (REMS) and the delta power of slow-wave activity (0.5–5 Hz) during NREM sleep are expressed as the 2 h means ± SEM during baseline recordings (closed circles) and sleep deprivation (SD, open circles) in NAB (n = 7), LAB (n = 10), HAB (n = 10) mice. SD began at the onset of the light period and lasted for 6 h. Two-way ANOVA among the three mouse lines revealed a significant effect of ‘line’ on EEG delta power in NREM sleep during the post-SD 6–12 h during the light period (<i>P</i><0.001) and on NREM and REM sleep and EEG delta power during the post-SD 13–18 h during the dark period (<i>P</i><0.05, <i>P</i><0.05, <i>P</i><0.001). * <i>P</i><0.05, ** <i>P</i><0.001, assessed by two-way ANOVA with the factors ‘line’ and ‘interval’ followed by Bonferroni's test.</p

    Latency to NREM and REM sleep during baseline conditions and after sleep deprivation in mouse models of anxiety.

    No full text
    <p>Values are the means in min ± SEM. The letters indicate a significant between-line difference (<i>P</i><0.05) within the individual parameter (a: from NAB mice, b: from LAB mice, c: from HAB mice), assessed by one-way ANOVA with the factor ‘line’ followed by Bonferroni's test. Statistical differences in values after sleep deprivation relative to the corresponding baseline values within each line, analyzed by <i>t</i>-test (* <i>P</i><0.05, ** <i>P</i><0.001). NREMS, non-REM sleep; REMS, REM sleep; SD, sleep deprivation.</p

    Sleep-wake distribution in the mouse model of trait anxiety.

    No full text
    <p>(A) Time-course changes in sleep-wake patterns and EEG delta power during NREM sleep of NAB (n = 7), LAB (n = 10) and HAB (n = 10) mice under baseline conditions. Data points represent 2 h means ± SEM of time spent in wake, NREM sleep (NREMS) and REM sleep (REMS). The delta power during NREM sleep is represented as the mean value ± SEM of normalized EEG power densities in the frequency range of 0.5–4.0 Hz restricted to NREM sleep. Two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) revealed significant effects of ‘line’ and ‘time’ for all vigilance states and delta power (P<0.001) and their interaction for all vigilance states across 24 h (wake, P<0.001; NREMS, <i>P</i><0.001; REMS, <i>P</i><0.05). (B) Percentage of time spent in wake, NREM and REM sleep and the normalized EEG power of delta band during the 12 h light and dark period. Values are the 12 h means ± SEM. *<i>P</i><0.05, **<i>P</i><0.001, assessed by one-way ANOVA with the factor ‘line’ followed by Bonferroni's test. The light-dark (LD) differences were analyzed as well. Two-way ANOVA revealed significant effects of ‘line’ and ‘LD interval’ for all vigilance states (<i>P</i><0.001) and their interaction for all vigilance states (<i>P</i><0.05). The direct comparisons between lines of the 12 h LD dynamics in circadian amplitudes were performed by one-way ANOVA with the factor ‘line’ followed by Tukey's test (wake, NREMS, <i>P</i><0.001; REMS, <i>P</i><0.05).</p

    EEG spectra during wakefulness, NREM and REM sleep in the mouse model of trait anxiety.

    No full text
    <p>NAB (n = 7), LAB (n = 10), HAB (n = 10). (A) Spectral distribution of EEG power densities averaged from all 4-s epochs scored as wake, NREM sleep (NREMS) and REM sleep (REMS) over 24 h of recording under baseline conditions. The power of every 0.25 Hz bin was first averaged across the individual vigilance state and then normalized as a group by calculating the percentage of each bin from the total power across 24 h (0.25–32 Hz). All figures show spectral distributions of the EEG power density in the frequency range of 0.25 to 25 Hz. Two-way ANOVA with the factors ‘frequency’ and ‘line’ followed by Bonferroni's test revealed significant effects of ‘frequency’ and an interaction between ‘frequency’ and ‘line’ for each vigilance state (<i>P</i><0.0001), whereas the ‘line’ effects were not significant. For REM sleep, the EEG theta peak frequency, between 6 and 9 Hz, is shown in the insertion. *<i>P</i><0.05, assessed by one-way ANOVA with the factor ‘line’ followed by Bonferroni's test. (B) Comparisons of EEG power density within the delta (0.5–5 Hz), theta (6 – 9 Hz), sigma (10 – 15 Hz), and beta (16 – 23 Hz) bands in the 12 h light and dark period for each vigilance state. Data are presented as the 12 h means ± SEM. The EEG power of each frequency band was normalized by total EEG power during 24 h. *<i>P</i><0.05, **<i>P</i><0.001, assessed by one-way ANOVA with the factor ‘line’ followed by Bonferroni's test.</p

    Quantitative analysis of c-Fos immunoreactivity in HAB, NAB and LAB mice under basal conditions and after OA exposure.

    No full text
    <p>Depicted are those areas (septal, hippocampal, amygdalar and hind brain areas) for which the Fischer LSD <i>post hoc</i> test revealed statistically significant differences in OA-stress-induced c-Fos response in HAB, NAB and LAB mice. Each column indicates the mean±SEM number of c-Fos positive cells in a tissue area of 0.01mm<sup>2</sup> (total c-Fos expression was quantified in the dentate gyrus). Basal groups: n = 5, OA-exposure: HAB: n = 9, NAB: n = 8, LAB: n = 8; *p<0.05, **p<0.01 vs HAB OA-group; # p<0.05, ## p<0.01 vs corresponding basal group; + p<0.05, ++ p<0.01 vs LAB OA-group;</p

    Behavioral parameters of HAB, NAB and LAB mice measured in the 5-min exposure to the OA.

    No full text
    <p>(a) Time spent in distal zone, entries into distal zone, total distance traveled. (b) Head-dip behavior. Values are expressed as mean±SEM. HAB: n = 9, NAB: n = 8, LAB: n = 8; * p<0.05, ** p<0.01.</p

    Schematic diagram showing the 59 areas in which c-Fos expression was quantified.

    No full text
    <p>Levels are based on the atlas of Franklin and Paxinos (1997). Squares indicate the placement of grids for counting of c-Fos positive cells. Asterisks indicate the regions in which HAB mice showed changes in OA-induced c-Fos expression as compared to LABs. AcB, nucleus (n.) accumbens; AcBc, n. accumbens core; AcBsh, n. accumbens shell; ACo, anterior cortical n. of the amygdala; AD, anterodorsal thalamic n.; AH, anterior hypothalamic area; Arc, arcuate hypothalamic nucleus; BlA, basolateral n. of the amygdala; BNST, bed n. of the stria terminalis; CA1, CA1 field of the hippocampus; CA3, CA3 field of the hippocampus; CeA, central n. of the amygdala; Cg 1, cingulate ctx (area1); Cg 2, cingulate ctx (area2); Cl, Claustrum; CPu, caudate putamen; cPAGdl, caudal dorsolateral periaqueductal gray; cPAGdm, caudal dorsomedial periaqueductal gray; cPAGl, caudal lateral periaqueductal gray; cPAGvl, caudal ventrolateral periaqueductal gray; DEn, Endopiriform ctx, dorsal; DG, dentate gyrus; DMH, dorsomedial hypothalamic n.; DP, dorsal peduncular nucleus; DR, dorsal raphe n.; GI, granular insular ctx; IL, infralimbic ctx; LA, lateral n. of the amygdala; LC, locus coeruleus; LGP, lateral globus pallidus; LH, lateral hypothalamic area; LHb, lateral habenular n.; LPB, lateral parabrachial n.; LSD, lateral septal n. (dorsal); LSI, lateral septal n. (intermediate); LSV, lateral septal n. (ventral); M1, primary motor ctx; M2, secondary motor ctx; MeA, medial amygdala; MGP, medial globus pallidus; MO, medial orbital cortex; MPA, medial preoptic area; MPO, medial preoptic n.; MPB, medial parabrachial n.; PE, periventricular n; Pir, piriform ctx; PLCo, posterolateral cortical n. of the amygdala; PrL, prelimbic ctx; PV, paraventricular thalamic n.; PVA, paraventricular thalamic n. (anterior); PVN, paraventricular hypothalamic n.; rPAGdl, rostral dorsolateral periaqueductal gray; rPAGdm, rostral dorsomedial periaqueductal gray; rPAGl, rostral lateral periaqueductal gray; RSA, retrosplenial agranular ctx; RSG, retrosplenial granular ctx; S1J, primary somatosensory cortex, jaw region; VMH, ventromedial hypothalamic n.</p

    Overview of c-Fos expression following open arm (OA) exposure in HAB, NAB and LAB mice.

    No full text
    <p>Values are numbers of c-Fos positive cells/0.01 mm<sup>2</sup>. (total number of c-Fos positive cells was quantified in the CA1 and CA3 region and the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus). 2-way ANOVA analysis results for <i>line x stress</i> interaction are given in the right column (brain areas showing significant interaction are shown in bold). 2-way ANOVA analysis results for the factor <i>stress</i> are indicated by # P<0.05, ## P<0.01 basal versus OA stress groups; basal groups: n = 5, OA-groups: n = 8–9;</p

    Contextual conditioned fear in HAB and NAB mice.

    No full text
    <p>Although freezing behaviour (assessed during each 2-min period post US presentation) increased in HAB and NAB animals in response to 5 US presentations to the same extent (A), indicating comparable fear conditioning of both lines, HAB mice displayed significantly higher fear responses than NAB mice when exposed to the conditioning context for 3 min 24 h later (B). Data are presented as means ± SEM. <i>n</i> = 9 per line. **<i>p</i><0.01 HAB vs. NAB, <sup>§§</sup><i>p</i><0.01 fear expression vs. last US presentation.</p
    corecore