Fig. 5

Spatial memory deficits in MWM for Gde2KO male mice. A Schematic of MWM task. Mice were tested over 4 days: during the first 2 days, the platform was in quadrant 1. During the last 2 days, the platform was moved to quadrant 3. B Total distance mice traveled before reaching the platform during non-probe trials. No effect of genotype or its interactions were detected (three-way mixed design ANOVA, Ps > 0.05) (C–E) Analysis of percent time spent in the central area of each quadrant during the probe trial at the end of day 2. WT and Gde2KO mice exhibit differences in time spent across quadrant areas (C, ANOVA, effect of area, F(3, ≥ 78) > 15.19, P < 0.0001). However, WT mice and not Gde2KO mice spent significantly more time in quadrant 1 compared to quadrant 2 (Fisher LSD post-hoc, P < 0.009 and P > 0.05, respectively). Only male WT mice spent significantly more time in quadrant 1 compared to quadrant 2 (E, Fisher LSD post-hoc, P < 0.006), while female WT mice showed no preference between quadrants (D, Fisher LSD post-hoc, P > 0.05). F–H The same measures and analyses as in C–E, respectively, for the probe trial at the start of day 3. WT and Gde2KO mice showed differences in time spent across quadrant areas (F, ANOVA, effect of area F(3,78) > 12.91, P < 0.0001). Only WT mice spent significantly more time in quadrant 1 compared to quadrant 2 (Fisher LSD post-hoc, P < 0.024). Specifically, only male WT mice spent significantly more time in quadrant 1 compared to quadrant 2 (H, Fisher LSD post-hoc, P < 0.039), while female WT mice showed no preference between quadrants (G, Fisher LSD post-hoc, P > 0.05). The dotted lines at 16% represent the expected time spent in each area due to chance. All graphs are means ± SEM; ns, P > 0.05; *P < 0.05, and **P < 0.01. See Additional file 2: Table S1 for statistical details. Schematic in A created in BioRender.com