Home cage-based insights into motor learning and strategy adaptation in a Huntington disease mouse model
Fig 6
Variability in performance and response to task dynamics.
(A) Upon a change in the required hold time (dashed line), a significant reduction in success rate was similarly observed for both WT and zQ175 mice (RM two-way ANOVA, genotype p = 0.926 F(1, 20) = 0.008736, trial p < 0.0001 F(3.915, 78.31) = 27.99, interaction p = 0.985 F(19, 380) = 0.4237). (B) The analysis of trajectory variability, quantified as DTW distance of consecutive trials, showed a non-significant trend towards greater variability in zQ175 mice, peaking later compared to WT mice (RM two-way ANOVA, genotype p = 0.070 F(1, 20) = 3.660, trial p = 0.0005 F(4.291, 85.82) = 5.351, interaction p = 0.542 F(19, 380) = 0.9329). (C) Similarly, hold time variability, measured by moving standard deviation of hold times, presented a pattern where zQ175 mice exhibited a later peak in variability, suggesting a slower adaptation process (RM two-way ANOVA, genotype p = 0.571 F(1, 20) = 0.3293, trial p = 0.155 F(4.597, 91.94) = 1.668, interaction p = 0.0075 F(19, 380) = 2.011). (D) Further examination of trajectory variability within a 10-trial bout showed no differences between genotypes, with both demonstrating a reduction in variability (RM two-way ANOVA, genotype p = 0.630 F(1, 22) = 0.2383, trial p = 0.0002 F(4.154, 91.39) = 6.081, interaction p = 0.693 F(8, 176) = 0.6970). (E) When focusing on five consecutive successful trials, WT mice showed a significant reduction in trajectory variability, whereas zQ175 mice exhibited only a slight decrease, predominantly in the last trial, hinting at genotype-specific differences in optimizing performance following success (RM two-way ANOVA, genotype p = 0.746 F(1, 22) = 0.1074, trial p = 0.012 F(2.836, 62.38) = 4.045, interaction p = 0.018 F(3, 66) = 3.561). (F) Conversely, in five consecutive failed trials, no significant change in trajectory variability was observed for either genotype (RM two-way ANOVA, genotype p = 0.755 F(1, 22) = 0.09948, trial p = 0.631 F(2.664, 58.61) = 0.5467, interaction p = 0.743 F(3, 66) = 0.4142). Data presented as mean±SEM.