Fig. 4
Perinatal LPS exposure moderately impairs motor and cognitive functions. A. Representative heatmaps illustrating the head movements of mice during the novel object recognition test, comparing exploration of a familiar object versus a novel object. B-E. Bar graphs showing the recognition index (novel object time/total exploration time) and the discrimination index [(novel object time − familiar object time)/total exploration time]. Two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post hoc correction (C, E) revealed a significant effect of LPS on the recognition index (F1,29 = 4.9, P = 0.035), but no effect of sex (F1,29 = 1.231, P = 0.27) and no interaction (F1,29 = 0.103, P = 0.75). Similarly, the discrimination index showed a significant LPS effect (F1,29 = 4.933, P = 0.035), with no effect of sex (F1,29 = 1.232, P = 0.27) and no interaction (F1,29 = 0.103, P = 0.75) (n = 6–9/group). For individual comparisons, Student’s unpaired t test (B, D) indicated significant differences in both the recognition index (t = 2.4, P = 0.02) and discrimination index (t = 2.4, P = 0.02). F. Representative heatmaps showing tracking patterns over 5-minute in the Y-maze. G. Bar graphs showing the percentage of spontaneous alternations calculated in the Y-maze test [(number of alternations/total number of entries − 2) × 100]. The Scheirer-Ray-Hare test with Kruskal‒Wallis test for pairwise comparisons showed a significant LPS effect (H = 9.0, P = 0.002), but no effect of sex (H = 1.7, P = 0.18) or interaction (H = 0.2, P = 0.62) (n = 9/group). H. Rotarod test setup. I-J. Bar graphs showing the latency to fall in both NS and LPS groups. Student’s unpaired t test for (I) and two-way ANOVA with Bonferroni post hoc correction for (J revealed an LPS effect (F1,35 = 5.0, P = 0.03), with no effect of sex (F1,31 = 1.2, P = 0.27) and no interaction (F1,31 = 0.1, P = 0.75; t = 2.2, P = 0.03) (n = 9/group). * P < 0.05