Supplementary Figure 3: Fmr1–/– mice do not slow down as much as WT mice during preferred stimuli (Hit responses) (corresponds to data in Fig. 1e,f). | Nature Neuroscience

Supplementary Figure 3: Fmr1–/– mice do not slow down as much as WT mice during preferred stimuli (Hit responses) (corresponds to data in Fig. 1e,f).

From: Impaired perceptual learning in a mouse model of Fragile X syndrome is mediated by parvalbumin neuron dysfunction and is reversible

Supplementary Figure 3

a. Workflow for ball motion analysis. b. Analysis of ball motion was done with semi-automated, custom MATLAB scripts to detect black dots painted evenly onto the polystyrene ball. c. Discriminability index for a subset of the mice shown in Fig. 1d in which we recorded running speed. d-f. Overall running speed (as determined by ball motion analysis) in WT and Fmr1-/- mice at session #1 (d), session #4 (e) and final learned session (f) for Hit + Miss trials only (corresponding to preferred stimuli). We observed a significant difference in the degree to which WT and Fmr1-/- mice slow down at session #4, but not in the final learned session. Repeated measures ANOVA F2,16 = 5.49, p = 2 × 10-5. Note there is no significant genotype differences in running speed in session 1 or in the final learned session. g-i. Change in running speed (as above). F2,16 = 2.13, p = 0.02. Shaded area in panels d-i indicate s.e.m.

Back to article page