Fig 1.
Preliminary work and general procedure of this study.
Table 1.
CUMS schedule.
Fig 2.
Results of the body weight of rats submitted to 6-week CUMS (mean ± SD, n = 40).
**p < 0.01 vs control.
Fig 3.
Results of sucrose preference of rats submitted to 6-week CUMS(mean ± SD, n = 40).
A: 1 h sucrose preference(%); B: 12 h sucrose preference(%); C: 24 h sucrose preference(%). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 vs control.
Fig 4.
Results of the coat status test of rats submitted to 6-week CUMS (mean ± SD, n = 40).
**p < 0.01 vs control.
Table 2.
Results of horizontal movement, rearing, grooming behaviors, feces, latency (sec), total scores in the open-field test of rats submitted to 6-week CUMS (mean± SD, n = 40).
Fig 5.
Results of the percentage of time and entries in the open arms in elevated plus-maze test of rats submitted to 6-week CUMS (mean ± SD, n = 40).
A: Time spent in open arms(%); B: Entries of open arms(%).**p < 0.01 vs control.
Fig 6.
Results of the latency and time of grooming behavior following a 10% sucrose solution spray in the splash test of rats submitted to 6-week CUMS(mean ± SD, n = 40).A: Grooming latency(sec); B: Grooming time(%).
**p < 0.01 vs control.
Fig 7.
Results of forced swimming test of rats submitted to 6-week CUMS (mean ± SD, n = 40).
**p < 0.01 vs control.
Fig 8.
Results of latency of Morris water maze test of rats in initial spatial training(mean ± SD, n = 40).
**P < 0.01 vs control.
Table 3.
Results of the latency and the times of passing in the MWM test of rats submitted to 6-week CUMS (mean ± SD, n = 40).
Table 4.
Variables entered and inclusion parameters.
Table 5.
Standardized discriminant function coefficients.
Table 6.
The assessment effect of discriminant functions.
Table 7.
Results of Pearson correlation coefficients (N = 40, Prob > |r| under H0: Rho = 0).