Fig. 2

Mice lacking Fmr1 in PV-expressing neurons exhibit mild anxiety-like behaviors and impaired social interaction. A Representative images of mPFC sections from WT-PV and Fmr1^−/y-PV mice, immunostained for PV and FMRP (scale bar: 50 μm). Bottom panels show enlarged boxed regions of individual PV-positive cells. B Time spent in the open arms of EPM was not significantly different between the genotypes (left), whereas Fmr1^−/y-PV mice spent more time in the closed arms (middle) and less time in the center (left) of the EPM; mean ± SEM (n = 12–14 animals per genotype). C Time spent self-grooming and D total number of marbles buried, as well as time spent burying/digging up marbles did not differ significantly between WT-PV and Fmr1^−/y-PV mice. Values represent mean ± SEM (n = 10–14 animals per genotype). E Fmr1^−/y-PV mice made significantly greater percentage of errors during the training portion of the Y Maze task, whereas their performance during LTM test and reversal portions was not significantly different between the genotypes. Values represent mean ± SEM (n = 12–13 animals per genotype). F Fmr1^−/y-PV and WT-PV mice spent more time sniffing a stranger mouse (S) compared to an object (O) during Sociability portion of the 3CSI Test. Values represent mean ± SEM (n = 12–14 animals per genotype). Preference Index (PI) for a stranger mouse was not different between the genotypes. G WT-PV mice spent significantly more time sniffing a novel stranger mouse (S2) compared to a familiar stranger mouse (S1) during the Social Novelty test, while Fmr1⁻.^/y-PV mice exhibited impaired social novelty behavior. (n = 12–14 animals per genotype). PI for a S2 was also significantly different between the genotypes; *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001; Two-way ANOVA or RM two-way ANOVA followed by Bonferroni’s multiple comparisons test, Student’s t test