Extended Data Fig. 1: Effects of THC and ethanol on motor coordination and the BEC in mice, Related to Fig. 1.
a, Schematic showing the timeline of drug administration and AR procedure. b, Effects of THC (i.p., 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 1.0, 3.0 and 5.0 mg/kg) on AR latency of mice. c, Schematic showing the timeline of drug administration and AR procedure. d, Effects of ethanol (i.p., 0.1, 0.3, 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0 g/kg) on AR latency of mice. e, Schematic showing the timeline of drug administration and AR procedure. f, Effects of THC and ethanol in combination on AR latency of mice. g, Effects of ethanol (i.p., 1.0 and 2.0 g/kg) alone or in combination with THC (i.p., 1.0 mg/kg) on AR latency of mice. h, Effects of ethanol on AR latency of female mice. i, Compare of effects of ethanol on AR latency between male and female mice. Each data were normalized to its control group. j, Effects of ethanol (i.p., 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0 g/kg) alone or in combination with THC (i.p., 1.0 mg/kg) on AR latency in female mice. k,l, Normalized AR latency of female (k) and male (l) mice receiving THC (i.p., 1.0 mg/kg) and ethanol (i.p., 0.5, 1.0 and 2.0 g/kg) in combination. Each data were normalized to the related ethanol alone group. m-o, BEC of mice treated with i.p. ethanol at 0.5 g/kg (m), 1.0 g/kg (n) or 2.0 g/kg (o) alone with or without i.p. THC (1.0 mg/kg). n = 3 mice per group. Values are represented as means ± s.e.m., n per group. Exact P values are shown. Statistical differences were determined by a one-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post hoc multiple-comparison test (b, d, f-h, j) or a two-way ANOVA followed by Tukey’s post hoc multiple-comparison test (i, k, l, m-o).
