barnes maze apparatus Search Results


90
Stoelting inc barnes maze apparatus
Barnes Maze Apparatus, supplied by Stoelting inc, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 90/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/barnes+maze+apparatus/pmc08491234-1028-1-31?v=Stoelting+inc
Average 90 stars, based on 1 article reviews
barnes maze apparatus - by Bioz Stars, 2026-07
90/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

86
San Diego Instruments barnes maze apparatus
(A-B) Anxiety-like behavior was measured as time spent in the center during an open field test (A) and locomotor activity was measured as distance traveled in WT (n=23) and MCUb KO mice (n=18); ns: not significant; Mann-Whitney test. (C) Comparison of grip strength between WT (n=17) and MCUb KO mice (n=18); ns: not significant; Mann-Whitney test. (D) Time to cross the beam for a beam balance test with 12- and 6-mm beam width as compared between WT (n=11) and MCUb KO mice (n=11) ns: not significant; Kruskal-Wallis test. (E) Latency to fall was measured in the rotarod test in WT (n=36) and MCUb KO (n=29) mice; ns: not significant; two-way ANOVA with Sidak’s multiple comparison. (F) Summary of withdrawal latency to heat stimulation in Hargreaves as examined in WT (n=15) and MCUb KO (n=10) mice; ns: not significant; Mann-Whitney test. (G) Summary of mechanical paw withdrawal thresholds using von Frey test as examined in WT (n=15) and MCUb KO (n=10) mice; ns: not significant; Mann-Whitney test. (H, I) Performance in <t>Barnes</t> <t>maze</t> spatial learning test as assessed by measuring latency to find escape hole for 4 training sessions (H) and by monitoring latency to find the escape hole on probe trial day (I); p<0.001 for day 4 versus day 1 comparison for WT mice and p<0.05 for day 4 versus day 1 comparison for MCUb KO mice; ns: not significant between WT (n=14) and MCUb KO (n=9) mice; two-way ANOVA with Sidak’s multiple comparison.
Barnes Maze Apparatus, supplied by San Diego Instruments, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/barnes+maze+apparatus/pmc12094165-134-8-11?v=San+Diego+Instruments
Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
barnes maze apparatus - by Bioz Stars, 2026-07
86/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

86
Noldus Information Technology barnes maze apparatus
(A-B) Anxiety-like behavior was measured as time spent in the center during an open field test (A) and locomotor activity was measured as distance traveled in WT (n=23) and MCUb KO mice (n=18); ns: not significant; Mann-Whitney test. (C) Comparison of grip strength between WT (n=17) and MCUb KO mice (n=18); ns: not significant; Mann-Whitney test. (D) Time to cross the beam for a beam balance test with 12- and 6-mm beam width as compared between WT (n=11) and MCUb KO mice (n=11) ns: not significant; Kruskal-Wallis test. (E) Latency to fall was measured in the rotarod test in WT (n=36) and MCUb KO (n=29) mice; ns: not significant; two-way ANOVA with Sidak’s multiple comparison. (F) Summary of withdrawal latency to heat stimulation in Hargreaves as examined in WT (n=15) and MCUb KO (n=10) mice; ns: not significant; Mann-Whitney test. (G) Summary of mechanical paw withdrawal thresholds using von Frey test as examined in WT (n=15) and MCUb KO (n=10) mice; ns: not significant; Mann-Whitney test. (H, I) Performance in <t>Barnes</t> <t>maze</t> spatial learning test as assessed by measuring latency to find escape hole for 4 training sessions (H) and by monitoring latency to find the escape hole on probe trial day (I); p<0.001 for day 4 versus day 1 comparison for WT mice and p<0.05 for day 4 versus day 1 comparison for MCUb KO mice; ns: not significant between WT (n=14) and MCUb KO (n=9) mice; two-way ANOVA with Sidak’s multiple comparison.
Barnes Maze Apparatus, supplied by Noldus Information Technology, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/barnes+maze+apparatus/pm41518007-80-1-12?v=Noldus+Information+Technology
Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
barnes maze apparatus - by Bioz Stars, 2026-07
86/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

86
Panlab barnes maze apparatus
Primary latency, defined as the time required for a mouse to reach the target hole for the first time, was measured in wild-type (WT, open squares) and APP/PS1 transgenic (TG, filled squares) mice during three consecutive training days (five trials per day) in the <t>Barnes</t> <t>maze.</t> At 6 and 12 months of age, no significant differences in primary latency were observed between WT and TG mice, indicating preserved learning performance. At 18 months, TG mice exhibited significantly longer latencies compared to age-matched WT controls on training days 1 and 2 ( P <0.01; LSD post hoc test). The insets show mean primary latency (±SEM) for each training day across ages, with 18-month-old TG mice performing worse than 6-month-old animals. Repeated-measures ANOVA confirmed significant main effects of genotype [F(1,51)=4.7; P <0.05] and significant trial day x age interaction effects on the primary latency of TG and WT animals [F(2,51)=7.5; P <0.01]. Data are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 9-11 per group).
Barnes Maze Apparatus, supplied by Panlab, used in various techniques. Bioz Stars score: 86/100, based on 1 PubMed citations. ZERO BIAS - scores, article reviews, protocol conditions and more
https://www.bioz.com/product/barnes+maze+apparatus/bio_rxiv__64898__2025__12__06__689974-36-1-4?v=Panlab
Average 86 stars, based on 1 article reviews
barnes maze apparatus - by Bioz Stars, 2026-07
86/100 stars
  Buy from Supplier

Image Search Results


(A-B) Anxiety-like behavior was measured as time spent in the center during an open field test (A) and locomotor activity was measured as distance traveled in WT (n=23) and MCUb KO mice (n=18); ns: not significant; Mann-Whitney test. (C) Comparison of grip strength between WT (n=17) and MCUb KO mice (n=18); ns: not significant; Mann-Whitney test. (D) Time to cross the beam for a beam balance test with 12- and 6-mm beam width as compared between WT (n=11) and MCUb KO mice (n=11) ns: not significant; Kruskal-Wallis test. (E) Latency to fall was measured in the rotarod test in WT (n=36) and MCUb KO (n=29) mice; ns: not significant; two-way ANOVA with Sidak’s multiple comparison. (F) Summary of withdrawal latency to heat stimulation in Hargreaves as examined in WT (n=15) and MCUb KO (n=10) mice; ns: not significant; Mann-Whitney test. (G) Summary of mechanical paw withdrawal thresholds using von Frey test as examined in WT (n=15) and MCUb KO (n=10) mice; ns: not significant; Mann-Whitney test. (H, I) Performance in Barnes maze spatial learning test as assessed by measuring latency to find escape hole for 4 training sessions (H) and by monitoring latency to find the escape hole on probe trial day (I); p<0.001 for day 4 versus day 1 comparison for WT mice and p<0.05 for day 4 versus day 1 comparison for MCUb KO mice; ns: not significant between WT (n=14) and MCUb KO (n=9) mice; two-way ANOVA with Sidak’s multiple comparison.

Journal: Cell calcium

Article Title: Mitochondrial Ca 2+ uniporter b (MCUb) regulates neuronal Ca 2+ dynamics and resistance to ischemic stroke

doi: 10.1016/j.ceca.2025.103013

Figure Lengend Snippet: (A-B) Anxiety-like behavior was measured as time spent in the center during an open field test (A) and locomotor activity was measured as distance traveled in WT (n=23) and MCUb KO mice (n=18); ns: not significant; Mann-Whitney test. (C) Comparison of grip strength between WT (n=17) and MCUb KO mice (n=18); ns: not significant; Mann-Whitney test. (D) Time to cross the beam for a beam balance test with 12- and 6-mm beam width as compared between WT (n=11) and MCUb KO mice (n=11) ns: not significant; Kruskal-Wallis test. (E) Latency to fall was measured in the rotarod test in WT (n=36) and MCUb KO (n=29) mice; ns: not significant; two-way ANOVA with Sidak’s multiple comparison. (F) Summary of withdrawal latency to heat stimulation in Hargreaves as examined in WT (n=15) and MCUb KO (n=10) mice; ns: not significant; Mann-Whitney test. (G) Summary of mechanical paw withdrawal thresholds using von Frey test as examined in WT (n=15) and MCUb KO (n=10) mice; ns: not significant; Mann-Whitney test. (H, I) Performance in Barnes maze spatial learning test as assessed by measuring latency to find escape hole for 4 training sessions (H) and by monitoring latency to find the escape hole on probe trial day (I); p<0.001 for day 4 versus day 1 comparison for WT mice and p<0.05 for day 4 versus day 1 comparison for MCUb KO mice; ns: not significant between WT (n=14) and MCUb KO (n=9) mice; two-way ANOVA with Sidak’s multiple comparison.

Article Snippet: Spatial learning and memory were tested using a Barnes maze apparatus (San Diego Instruments) consisting of a circular platform (91 cm diameter) with 20 equally spaced holes (5 cm diameter) around its edges, and a 20×5×5 cm escape box below one hole.

Techniques: Activity Assay, MANN-WHITNEY, Comparison

Primary latency, defined as the time required for a mouse to reach the target hole for the first time, was measured in wild-type (WT, open squares) and APP/PS1 transgenic (TG, filled squares) mice during three consecutive training days (five trials per day) in the Barnes maze. At 6 and 12 months of age, no significant differences in primary latency were observed between WT and TG mice, indicating preserved learning performance. At 18 months, TG mice exhibited significantly longer latencies compared to age-matched WT controls on training days 1 and 2 ( P <0.01; LSD post hoc test). The insets show mean primary latency (±SEM) for each training day across ages, with 18-month-old TG mice performing worse than 6-month-old animals. Repeated-measures ANOVA confirmed significant main effects of genotype [F(1,51)=4.7; P <0.05] and significant trial day x age interaction effects on the primary latency of TG and WT animals [F(2,51)=7.5; P <0.01]. Data are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 9-11 per group).

Journal: bioRxiv

Article Title: Age-specific Aβ-Tau interactions underlie spatial memory deficits in an APP/PS1 amyloidosis model

doi: 10.64898/2025.12.06.689974

Figure Lengend Snippet: Primary latency, defined as the time required for a mouse to reach the target hole for the first time, was measured in wild-type (WT, open squares) and APP/PS1 transgenic (TG, filled squares) mice during three consecutive training days (five trials per day) in the Barnes maze. At 6 and 12 months of age, no significant differences in primary latency were observed between WT and TG mice, indicating preserved learning performance. At 18 months, TG mice exhibited significantly longer latencies compared to age-matched WT controls on training days 1 and 2 ( P <0.01; LSD post hoc test). The insets show mean primary latency (±SEM) for each training day across ages, with 18-month-old TG mice performing worse than 6-month-old animals. Repeated-measures ANOVA confirmed significant main effects of genotype [F(1,51)=4.7; P <0.05] and significant trial day x age interaction effects on the primary latency of TG and WT animals [F(2,51)=7.5; P <0.01]. Data are expressed as mean ± SEM (n = 9-11 per group).

Article Snippet: The Barnes maze apparatus (Panlab S.L.U., Barcelona, Spain) was a circular platform with 20 equidistant holes around its perimeter, elevated 1.5 m above the floor and brightly illuminated by four 120W halogen lamps, to create an aversive environment.

Techniques: Transgenic Assay

The spatial distribution of nose-pokes across all holes of the Barnes maze was analyzed in wild-type (WT, open circles) and APP/PS1 transgenic (TG, filled circles) mice during the probe trials, which were conducted 24 hours (Day 4) and 8 days (Day 11) after training. The dashed horizontal line represents the level of nose-poking expected by chance (random performance). Insets show the total number of nose-pokes performed during each session. (A) At 6 months of age, WT and TG mice showed comparable search patterns and similar total nose-poke counts. (B) At 12 months, TG mice made significantly fewer nose-pokes in the target hole compared to WT animals on Day 11 ( P <0.01–0.001), indicating impaired memory for the target location. (C) At 18 months, TG mice exhibited impaired spatial memory, as shown by reduced preference for the target hole compared to WT mice on Day 4 ( P <0.001). WT animals also showed reduced target-directed responding between Days 4 and 11 ( P <0.01). Repeated measures ANOVA confirmed significant main effects of genotype [F(1,102)=8.4; P <0.01] and age [F(2,102)=6.6; P <0.01] on the distribution of nose-pokes, along with significant hole x genotype [F(19,1938)=7.2; P <0.001], hole x age [F(38,1938)=3.1; P <0.001] and hole x trial day interaction effects [F(19,1938)=3.3; P <0.001]. Data are expressed as mean ± SEM of n = 9-11 mice per group.

Journal: bioRxiv

Article Title: Age-specific Aβ-Tau interactions underlie spatial memory deficits in an APP/PS1 amyloidosis model

doi: 10.64898/2025.12.06.689974

Figure Lengend Snippet: The spatial distribution of nose-pokes across all holes of the Barnes maze was analyzed in wild-type (WT, open circles) and APP/PS1 transgenic (TG, filled circles) mice during the probe trials, which were conducted 24 hours (Day 4) and 8 days (Day 11) after training. The dashed horizontal line represents the level of nose-poking expected by chance (random performance). Insets show the total number of nose-pokes performed during each session. (A) At 6 months of age, WT and TG mice showed comparable search patterns and similar total nose-poke counts. (B) At 12 months, TG mice made significantly fewer nose-pokes in the target hole compared to WT animals on Day 11 ( P <0.01–0.001), indicating impaired memory for the target location. (C) At 18 months, TG mice exhibited impaired spatial memory, as shown by reduced preference for the target hole compared to WT mice on Day 4 ( P <0.001). WT animals also showed reduced target-directed responding between Days 4 and 11 ( P <0.01). Repeated measures ANOVA confirmed significant main effects of genotype [F(1,102)=8.4; P <0.01] and age [F(2,102)=6.6; P <0.01] on the distribution of nose-pokes, along with significant hole x genotype [F(19,1938)=7.2; P <0.001], hole x age [F(38,1938)=3.1; P <0.001] and hole x trial day interaction effects [F(19,1938)=3.3; P <0.001]. Data are expressed as mean ± SEM of n = 9-11 mice per group.

Article Snippet: The Barnes maze apparatus (Panlab S.L.U., Barcelona, Spain) was a circular platform with 20 equidistant holes around its perimeter, elevated 1.5 m above the floor and brightly illuminated by four 120W halogen lamps, to create an aversive environment.

Techniques: Transgenic Assay

Pearson correlation analyses between Barnes maze performance and neuropathological measures in 6-, 12-, and 18-month-old APP/PS1 transgenic mice. Significant negative correlations were observed between Aβ plaque load and target block time in all cortical regions and the hippocampus (r = −0.43 to −0.63, P <0.05–0.001), indicating that higher amyloid burden was associated with poorer spatial memory performance. (B) [ 18 F]Flortaucipir binding also correlated negatively with target block time in all regions analyzed (r = −0.50 to −0.57, P <0.01), linking increased tau accumulation with cognitive impairment. (C) [ 3 H]UCB-J binding, a marker of synaptic density, showed weaker correlations, reaching significance only in the frontal (r = −0.45, P <0.05) and parietal/temporal cortices (r = −0.38, P<0.05). Scatter plots on the right illustrate representative correlations between target block time and the total levels of each pathological marker in the brain.

Journal: bioRxiv

Article Title: Age-specific Aβ-Tau interactions underlie spatial memory deficits in an APP/PS1 amyloidosis model

doi: 10.64898/2025.12.06.689974

Figure Lengend Snippet: Pearson correlation analyses between Barnes maze performance and neuropathological measures in 6-, 12-, and 18-month-old APP/PS1 transgenic mice. Significant negative correlations were observed between Aβ plaque load and target block time in all cortical regions and the hippocampus (r = −0.43 to −0.63, P <0.05–0.001), indicating that higher amyloid burden was associated with poorer spatial memory performance. (B) [ 18 F]Flortaucipir binding also correlated negatively with target block time in all regions analyzed (r = −0.50 to −0.57, P <0.01), linking increased tau accumulation with cognitive impairment. (C) [ 3 H]UCB-J binding, a marker of synaptic density, showed weaker correlations, reaching significance only in the frontal (r = −0.45, P <0.05) and parietal/temporal cortices (r = −0.38, P<0.05). Scatter plots on the right illustrate representative correlations between target block time and the total levels of each pathological marker in the brain.

Article Snippet: The Barnes maze apparatus (Panlab S.L.U., Barcelona, Spain) was a circular platform with 20 equidistant holes around its perimeter, elevated 1.5 m above the floor and brightly illuminated by four 120W halogen lamps, to create an aversive environment.

Techniques: Transgenic Assay, Blocking Assay, Binding Assay, Marker